Initial Domination Rankings

[DeletedUser11795]

Body Shamers came into the Domination Era with an overpowering 49.28% of the ~2700 valid Domination Cities.

Inno messed up though, and ONLY the players within our alliance who were on VM were attackable after we clicked Last Stand. So about 16% (Stray Cats plus 3 VM members we dropped that then became unattackable) of all Domination Cities are on VM and thus unattackable.

So our 50% tally as of this morning, is actually out of a possible 84% of all cities that we even have access to. That makes our victory all the more dominant, in my opinion, because we actually have something closer to 65 or 70% of all of the cities that we have access to (seeing as we have 50% of ALL cities while only having access to 84% of them..I am sure that you see what I am saying.)

Here are the domination ranks as of when this post was made, with about 13 days and 1 hour left in Last Stand. (We would need to lose over 275 cities AND have someone else pick up 1000 cities to lose, it's not going to happen)


1 Body Shamers 1371 50.65%
2 Stray Cats 359 13.26% --- NOTE: Almost all in VM and inaccessible!
3 Not Body Shamers 327 12.08%
4 The Revolution 190 7.02%
5 Redheaded stepkids 70 2.59%
6 Killer Clowns? 53 1.96%
7 The Crazies 43 1.59%
8 Syndicate 30 1.11%
9 Chaos 28 1.03%
10 Fool's Graveyard 27 1%

NOTE: 71 Domination Cities in No Alliance (About 44 of those being ex-BS members in VM)

 

[DeletedUser11795]

Being said, Inno needs to fix this thing with the players not in the alliance holding last stand being able to be in VM even though they are fielding Domination Cities.

Because if this is the case, then players can essentially VM to hide and protect Dominatin Cities which SURELY by some group somewhere could be used against the spirit of the game to limit some groups capability to access, and then take, Domination cities to improve their own % via locking Domination cities within VM.

I also wonder how unattackable bans will work during Domination? I hate unattackable bans, they function as nothing more than free VM days because the player is perfectly protected. I have known of players SEEKING TO GET BANNED and cursing people out in PM's while being opped as a last ditch effort to protect themselves because otherwise they would have to wait 48 hours for VM to kick in, as opposed to a mod giving them an unattackable ban, and whom generally will get back with and look into something within 24 hours.

Obviously this is the first Domination server and bugs need to be worked out. The issue of players being in VM in about 16% of Mochlos Domination cities needs to be looked into as it states in the Domination rules that this is not the intention. Also I think that any and all bans need to be attackable during Last Stand, or at least the player's Domination cities be attackable.

 

[DeletedUser1162]

. (We would need to lose over 275 cities AND have someone else pick up 1000 cities to lose, it's not going to happen)

My allies were trying to formulate how to break up the BS lead, and I sadly reminded them of those numbers.
My suggestion was to congratulate BS now - so I'll do it.
Gratz on the win.

I do think it's messed up that a dead alliance Stray Cats will end up in the top 3 ......

 

[Meg TheBeagle]

I've gotten a few notes kind of whining that the only reason BS won was because of a few big golders in our alliance. Even if we back out their city counts from the total, we're still above the 40% minimum.

Just saying that we dominated. Period. Other alliances may have had a better showing if they hadn't run into VM at the first sign of adversity.

 

[Ryvirath]

I will be looking into the issue with VM and the cities. Any cities on large islands in VM during last stand shouldn't be able to be invul'd, but if that is the case its something we'll have to fix. Apologies for any inconvenience.

 

[DeletedUser16279]

Inno should also fix the coalition/sister alliance forming in all domination worlds... that’s how this world was ruined... it’s a waste of domination worlds when certain alliances do it...

 

[DeletedUser16279]

I've gotten a few notes kind of whining that the only reason BS won was because of a few big golders in our alliance. Even if we back out their city counts from the total, we're still above the 40% minimum.

Just saying that we dominated. Period. Other alliances may have had a better showing if they hadn't run into VM at the first sign of adversity.

Gold had nothing to do with it, forming a coalition in a domination world was a cheap move.....

 

[stevehazelnuttehepic]

forming a coalition in a domination world was a cheap move.....

I wouldn't call 4/3rds the alliance cap a "coalition"

 

[Meg TheBeagle]

Gold had nothing to do with it, forming a coalition in a domination world was a cheap move.....

Coalition? Are you actually playing in Moch??? Exactly who was Body Shamers in coalition with? If you say Not Body Shamers, they were a small 30 member overflow of BS.

Didn't Revolution have a few failed Pact/naps? Blame yourselves.

 

[DeletedUser16279]

Coalition? Are you actually playing in Moch??? Exactly who was Body Shamers in coalition with? If you say Not Body Shamers, they were a small 30 member overflow of BS.

Didn't Revolution have a few failed Pact/naps? Blame yourselves.

Do you not get it? Once a strong coalition forms, it forces all other alliances to form up. Once one group breaks the rules, the others have to do the same in order to keep up. Gold has something to do with it yes, but anyone can use gold so if you’re complaining about gold then, that’s more on you than anyone.

 

[DeletedUser16279]

Regardless, there is a 50 player cap for a reason...

 

[Meg TheBeagle]

Do you not get it? Once a strong coalition forms, it forces all other alliances to form up. Once one group breaks the rules, the others have to do the same in order to keep up. Gold has something to do with it yes, but anyone can use gold so if you’re complaining about gold then, that’s more on you than anyone.

Do YOU not get it? There was no Body Shamers coalition. Just you writing it here doesn't make it so.

 

[DeletedUser16279]

Do YOU not get it? There was no Body Shamers coalition. Just you writing it here doesn't make it so.

I don’t write facts on here just to waste my time, read the facts I displayed or don’t comment back at all...You commenting on here saying it isn’t a coalition doesn’t make it so...

 

[Rodrk]

I will be looking into the issue with VM and the cities. Any cities on large islands in VM during last stand shouldn't be able to be invul'd, but if that is the case its something we'll have to fix. Apologies for any inconvenience.

ETA on this? We're down to day's until it's over and would like to beat up some more people. This is LAME! If this was a competitive world, it would be devastating. Why have a beta?

and Uhtred i get your point. Mafia really botched this world. We had not planned any diplomacy or more then 50 players. Them going crazy and recruiting everyone did really change the approach. It also created opportunity, since Cats would never have sought diplomacy with us had that not happened.

Basically, Mafia had everything they needed to be competitive with us. In fact, out of the gate, they came running at BS which was even more dopey.

Mafia had plenty of food and room to grow, instead they recruited, grew too big, expanded to quickly in the wrong direction and imploded in an epic disaster. Mafia could have won.

As far as cats go, had mafia played smart, cats would not even register in the top 10. BS would have devoured them sooner then later. Even when pacted with us Cats were fighting smaller alliances and barley taking cities from Mafia. The only way they would have been a contender is if they worked with LAF. A deal with Revolution was a little late, but even that may have helped provide some fight.

 

[DeletedUser16279]

Maybe it doesn’t fall under the definition of “coalition” persay, but it’s still cheap and not meant to happen in domination worlds, but it will always happens because humans are humans.

 

[DeletedUser16279]

And I doubt any alliance would have beat BS anyways, but seeing how their second alliance has been top 3 the whole time, (once FAL broke up anyways) It hasn’t been exactly fair sided...

 

[Rodrk]

And I doubt any alliance would have beat BS anyways,.

Now you are making sense

 

[Meg TheBeagle]

And I doubt any alliance would have beat BS anyways, but seeing how their second alliance has been top 3 the whole time, (once FAL broke up anyways) It hasn’t been exactly fair sided...

So BS played unfairly? Or did the rest of them just plain suck?

In my opinion, BS just out-played everybody.

 

[Ryvirath]

As an update here, there was an issue with the translation available on the wiki as it relates to the rules and this will be corrected.
The way it works is, the towns of the alliance that activates the last stand are eligible for attack on valid islands, even through vacation mode. Not that everyones towns in every alliance are available to be attacked.

 

[Rodrk]

Thanks for the update, appreciate your responsiveness. It does however still allow for VM to be used to slow down / screw a world up. It made sense where any eligible cities that are VM would be attackable. Does not really make sense to only put that on the alliance in last stand. Kind of a let down