after all this bad taking on asguard,let me state that not all asguards r not bad,some fleetsave,and play well,its the ones who dont thats giving them a bad name,but there is some good asguards.

lordru wrote:after all this bad taking on asguard,let me state that not all asguards r not bad,some fleetsave,and play well,its the ones who dont thats giving them a bad name,but there is some good asguards.

I dont think all of AZG is bad at all, i just found the 2-3 that ive had run into in the game, have all acted very rudely and even threaten my planets. I welcomed them to attack as its the game, i think that Quality outweighs Quantity, and if the ones that make your alliance look bad, why even keep them? Pts is pts in the game, but looking at the alliance rankings, it clearly shows Quality > Quantity.

I think your right though about some being cool and a few make the alliance seem bad, but overall ive run into a couple cool guys, and a few that were not so cool.

yes crippler,the main percentage of asguards ive heard from including their leader defient has been rude,but their is some good ones,

Yet to meet a good player in AZG but Ill take your word on that, out of 79 there has to be at least one decent player among them. If AZG want to stand a chance and gain a good rep, they should cut the numbers and implement a stronger chain of command as well as boot all inactives. Keeping inactives just to keep on top is pointless. Small players raid inactives, they will see that most of those inactives are AZG, it doesnt do much for the alliance as these players will grow to see AZG as a huge farm.

They may be ranked #1 but how many are in the top 10?

Squirrel wrote:Yet to meet a good player in AZG but Ill take your word on that, out of 79 there has to be at least one decent player among them. If AZG want to stand a chance and gain a good rep, they should cut the numbers and implement a stronger chain of command as well as boot all inactives. Keeping inactives just to keep on top is pointless. Small players raid inactives, they will see that most of those inactives are AZG, it doesnt do much for the alliance as these players will grow to see AZG as a huge farm.

They may be ranked #1 but how many are in the top 10?

+1

No side is ever all bad. During the holocaust, their were good Nazis and bad Jews. It's never completely one sided, but I have yet to here any of those few players' good deeds for the game.

Well, personally...even tho I have had many encounters with AZG, I can say that there are some good players, and I mean that as they are good at play, and good people. I have encountered at least 6-8 different AZG players dealing with hitting me, or involved in a hit (all of which cost them). Only 1 has been sooo ingorant that he thought his being 100 levels ahead of me would give him an upper hand automatically. As for the rest, communication with them tends to unfold that there is a sense of AZG lordship and honor amongst themselves, yet they have the ability to understand good play. I dont personally believe in using (i) accounts as personal Alliance farms, which is what I presume they do based on both the inactivity AND the active players attitudes about me assisting their farming efforts. And I surely dont believe in a gang rape of 5 or 6 players ranked in the top 30 probing and looking for a hit on one guy ranked 150-180. Bully tactics peeve me. But, all in all, I can say that I will most definitely end up hitting them now and then, simply because they are so big and so spread, its the ONLY way for me to continue a good growth rate.

AZG is a generic, anything goes, swarm tactic alliance. I'm not saying thats bad, just saying thats their strategy. What makes them so different than say..~V~. ~V~ is a tight knit group not allowing much growth except their own. A group of 8, ranked No. 2 or RAWK, a group of 20 ranked No.3 each with a pretty good avg ppm. They dont seem to care much for smaller players or expanding to assist. See we can pick apart anybody that doesnt fit our mold of play. You either get on the band wagon of the big guy, or you root for the underdog. Oh and you think AZG is bad about the (i) players...OMG check out MOC.. maybe 2 players out of all their members are active that I have seen so far.

Spankie wrote: Oh and you think AZG is bad about the (i) players...OMG check out MOC.. maybe 2 players out of all their members are active that I have seen so far.

Did you know that MOC used to be the rank #2 alliance? They were a second AZG at one point, guess they fell behind.

-Istalris-

Spankie wrote:
I'm not saying thats bad, just saying thats their strategy. What makes them so different than say..~V~. ~V~ is a tight knit group not allowing much growth except their own.

SBT was a new player when he joined, as was SD. We took both players in and look at them now. We rather have 8-10 high quality players than 50 mediocre players. If we let in every single applicant, we would have over 100 players now, easy.

It's wonderful what a tag can do for some people.