Jump to content

DoW


King James XVIII

Recommended Posts

WAR!!

A bit busy right now but TPC and CoS declare war on RE.

A better DoW later...
----

[center][img]http://i736.photobucket.com/albums/xx9/xFR4NKtheT4NKx/sicklephoenixflag3.jpg[/img]

Well sure enough, once you go to a friends with benefits system you just can't quit the other person.

If you don't know by now...TPC and CoS declares war on Roman Empire.

We haz stats if you need 'em

o/ RE
o/ War

Awesome job so far RE B-) [/center]

Edited by King James XVIII
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Einer' timestamp='1327905682' post='2910393']
It just wouldn't be Monday without a war against Eumirbago. :wub:
[/quote]
Please tell me you are toying with his body, with your navy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Einer' timestamp='1327905682' post='2910393']
It just wouldn't be Monday without a war against Eumirbago. :wub:
[/quote]

:wub:

[quote name='Stelios' timestamp='1327935906' post='2910599']
Please tell me you are toying with his body, with your navy
[/quote]

Sold land :awesome:

Good luck everyone :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stats after blitz:
RE: 56 Nations, 480k NS, 8420 average, 125 nukes; 5 @ 20k+, 14 @ 10k+
TPC/CoS: 29 Nations, 397k NS, 13255 average, 175 nukes; 6 @ 20k+, 20 @ 10k+

Basically a war between upper tiers. TPC/CoS has the definite advantage there, which (hopefully) gets neutralized once we can drag them down into our creamy filling mid-tier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='jraenar' timestamp='1327991499' post='2911406']
Stats after blitz:
RE: 56 Nations, 480k NS, 8420 average, 125 nukes; 5 @ 20k+, 14 @ 10k+
TPC/CoS: 29 Nations, 397k NS, 13255 average, 175 nukes; 6 @ 20k+, 20 @ 10k+

Basically a war between upper tiers. TPC/CoS has the definite advantage there, which (hopefully) gets neutralized once we can drag them down into our creamy filling mid-tier.
[/quote]
I believe discpline in the lower tier can pay off. Once the high tier gets lower 3 lower tier can jump them and believe me it makes a difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter how you slice it, it is still a nice up declare by TPC / CoS.

When I first saw the war screens last night all I could see was TPC going against RE.
Thought, Dammmnn!!, now that is one serious up declare.

Just wanted to wish you guys all good luck and throw a quick "Hey" out there to King James.
Nice job my friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Devil Dog' timestamp='1327992081' post='2911415']
No matter how you slice it, it is still a nice up declare by TPC / CoS.

When I first saw the war screens last night all I could see was TPC going against RE.
Thought, Dammmnn!!, now that is one serious up declare.

Just wanted to wish you guys all good luck and throw a quick "Hey" out there to King James.
Nice job my friend.
[/quote]
Not that simple. More than half of RE can't even declare a war because there are no targets in range for them. From a straight number of nations and total NS perspective, yes it's "up-declare." But from a tier breakdown, it's a pretty massive down-declare on the upper tier, and a (practically non-existent) lower tier up-declare for TPC/CoS.

--edit: Should note, I'm not complaining about the declaration. It's always fun fighting TPC. Just pointing out that things are very lopsided, and the nation and NS counts don't tell the whole story.

Now, Romans who were told war was coming and were sitting at DEFCON 5 with no camps... THAT I will complain about :lol1:

Edited by jraenar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Devil Dog' timestamp='1327992081' post='2911415']
No matter how you slice it, it is still a nice up declare by TPC / CoS.

When I first saw the war screens last night all I could see was TPC going against RE.
Thought, Dammmnn!!, now that is one serious up declare.

Just wanted to wish you guys all good luck and throw a quick "Hey" out there to King James.
Nice job my friend.
[/quote]

lolwut

Do you understand stats or no? The only 'advantage' and I would hardly call it an 'advantage' is that RE has twice as many nations as TPC/CoS and because of that results in a slightly larger total NS. Also note that CoS has only fought one war thus far the entire 60 days (this one doesn't count) and have been infras hugging the entire round (Infras Hugging and TPC in the same sentence? This is becoming quite the reoccurrence!) Given the way that they are growing, it's likely an easy deduction that they have massive warchests and the fact that 1 nation in CoS has over 100k casualties, it's a pretty good indication that they're over prepared or more prepared to fight then RE.

On that note, when's LE going to war? Shooting for another 30 days and another 90 mil warchest? :smug:

Edited by SoADarthCyfe6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='SoADarthCyfe6' timestamp='1328020024' post='2911524']
lolwut

Do you understand stats or no? The only 'advantage' and I would hardly call it an 'advantage' is that RE has twice as many nations as TPC/CoS and because of that results in a slightly larger total NS. Also note that CoS has only fought one war thus far the entire 60 days (this one doesn't count) and have been infras hugging the entire round (Infras Hugging and TPC in the same sentence? This is becoming quite the reoccurrence!) Given the way that they are growing, it's likely an easy deduction that they have massive warchests and the fact that 1 nation in CoS has over 100k casualties, it's a pretty good indication that they're over prepared or more prepared to fight then RE.

On that note, when's LE going to war? Shooting for another 30 days and another 90 mil warchest? :smug:
[/quote]
O the CoS guys are the NEW runners. They go for flag always. Endorsed by TPC :awesome:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Current nation tier stats:

TPC: 2 x 20k, 8 x 15k, 10 x 10k, 17 x 7k
CoS: 3 x 20k 4 x 15k, 5 x 10k, 6 x 7k

Tot: 5 x 20k, 12 x 15k, 15 x 10k, 23 x 7k
RE: 0 x 20k, 7 x 15k, 11 x 10k, 23 x 7k

The numbers at the top were pretty biased in favor of TPC/CoS from the start, really. I think RE had one 20k nation at the start of the war? If RE manages to get some TPC nations down into range for their smaller nations, maybe they can have a better chance but that will probably take longer than this war will last. The bottom 30 or so of TPC nations aren't able to do very much at all right now and can't much be counted as part of the war. The top looks like TPC is fighting very downhill.

So hey maybe RE's bottom 20 nations or whatever can declare war on some smaller alliance just to make things a bit more even in nations numbers. That would be fair right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='King James XVIII' timestamp='1327903079' post='2910319']
We haz stats if you need 'em
[/quote]

Apparently they do. Compiled one hour before DOW:

[quote]
RE
57 Nations
494, 066 NS
8,668 ANS
133 nukes (15 nations)
5 MP's
13 SDI's

5 nations over 20k
5 between 15-20k
6 between 10-15
18 between 5-10
[/quote]

[quote]
TPC
29 Nations
382,942 NS
13,204
159 nukes (18)
6 MPs
6 SDIs

7 over 20k
5 between 15-20
8 between 10-15
3 between 5-10
[/quote]

And as a bonus, I'll note that there are currently 34 RE nations within range of the nation that is 2/3 of the way down our list of effective fighters (#16, at 9728 NS). That number should only increase, since we didn't assign any wars below their top 25ish and hence they've been free to continue growing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an aside, winning ground attacks is an integral part of winning wars. In lieu of this, winning air attacks might suffice as well. Victory will prove elusive as long as you continue winning neither. :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Einer' timestamp='1328061071' post='2912000']
As an aside, winning ground attacks is an integral part of winning wars. In lieu of this, winning air attacks might suffice as well. Victory will prove elusive as long as you continue winning neither. :ph34r:
[/quote]
I keep stressing the need to coordinate attacks with those at war with the same targets. And they still go off attacking solo, allowing rebuys in between. I have half a mind to bring back RECAP and kick all the repeat offenders down to the minor leagues until the lesson sinks in. At the current rate, RECAP would be twice the size of RE :/

As for stats, from what I pulled post-blitz, if you discard nations below X level of NS from both sides, RE was at at least a 20% NS disadvantage every step of 2k NS until you get to 6k NS, where the two sides finally reach NS parity. I got the stat sheet on my other computer, I'll post it later. Even accounting for the losses from the blitz, TPC/CoS had (and has) a huge advantage in upper tier, and no lower tier to worry about.

Until we make the new TPC/CoS lower tier, that is.

--edit: And the stat sheet:
[IMG]http://i40.tinypic.com/1zdniw1.png[/IMG]

Mis-remembered slightly, only 11% disadvantage at 8k and above, which I'm willing to grant would be accounted for by blitz damage.

Edited by jraenar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Einer' timestamp='1328061071' post='2912000']
As an aside, winning ground attacks is an integral part of winning wars. In lieu of this, winning air attacks might suffice as well. Victory will prove elusive as long as you continue winning neither. :ph34r:
[/quote]
All i see you do is brag yet all i ever see you do is Down declare on nations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='jraenar' timestamp='1328066524' post='2912123']from what I pulled [s]post-blitz[/s] after TPC had finished reducing our NS for us[/quote]

FIFY

[quote name='Stelios']...[/quote]

:lol1:

Edited by Einer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A spy operation has been launched against your nation. In the attack the enemy spies targeted your nuclear missiles and managed to destroy 0 nukes. Your attacker was able to return home unharmed and unidentified.
.
.
.
.
.
lmao gotta love my ninja nukes

Edited by zephyrmaten
Link to comment
Share on other sites

/Begin Wall of Text

There was no intent by TPC to down declare on RE. As the DOW states, this is a friend-with-benefits war, at least from our perspective. TPC wanted an offensive war with COS at our side to evaluate war performance, in consideration of our goals we felt RE was the best fit. It's really as simple as that.

To suggest that "the third times the charm" implies that we tried something twice and failed, hoping the third attempt would work. We didn't "try" anything twice, RE attacked us in the first two wars, not the other way around. It also implies that TPC failed in the earlier wars. TPC and RE both dealt damage and both rebuilt and from our perspective it was simply some fun wars without any victory implied or confirmed. If RE wants to claim earlier victories I guess we'd have to look at some stats that support that position. It certainly doesn't matter enough to us to look up but afaik it was close, there was no clear victor. Similarly, we are not seeking any victory now, we are simply trying to have a fun war with an AA we have always considered friends. Our expectation was to have some fun and evaluate our members, that is all.

With regard to numbers I will echo what I said to other AAs in previous discussions - [b]please compare apples to apples[/b]. The pre war stats show what both AAs looked like [b]BEFORE[/b] military buy up - this is an accurate comparison to assess the DOW.

Using numbers from several hours after blitz compares our full strength to partial RE strength, many RE had not even bought back lost military let alone maxed their NS with full purchases nor had they countered yet and taken any NS away from us. Worse still, using stats several days into the war Clash does not give you a good comparison - you can compare pre war or post war, everything else provides tainted results. The only real value of mid war stats is for internal analysis of war performance or to argue the need for peace during a curb stomp.

Expanded on the stats E posted earlier [b]let's take a closer look at the top nations only.[/b] These stats were also compiled one hour before blitz.

RE
21 Targets
322,958 NS
15,378 ANS
133 nukes (15 nations)
5 MP's
12 SDI's

5 nations over 20k
6 between 15-20k
5 between 10-15
5 between 5-10


TPC/COS
23 Fighting
360,898 NS
15,691 ANS
159 nukes (18 nations)
6 MPs
6 SDIs

7 over 20k NS
4 between 15-20
9 between 10-15
3 between 5-10

As you can see the numbers were very close, we had more nukes and they had double our SDI count. Also, our larger navies bloated our NS/ANS but as many know navy has limited value in most wars, it certainly did in this war. As I said, this was never intended to be a down declare, we were very careful to make sure we were treating our friends fairly as I'm sure they were in their earlier DOWs on TPC.

Beyond these very close numbers RE had more nations and would be capable of expanding their fighting force as the war progressed. We had no such option, what we brought was our entire effective fighting force. This is not our "upper tier", this is all of our fighters - 23 of our 28 nations. The remaining 5 nations are trade fillers and new recruits unprepared for war. Characterizing this as upper tier versus upper tier is incorrect. It would be more accurate to say this all of TPC/COS versus RE's best.

Personally, I am disappointed when I see friends question our conduct or portray us as braggarts that down declare. As far as E's war actions I think when a single nation can tie up 45 nukes by putting 3 targets in anarchy [i]by himself[/i] that's just good strategy. As jraenar pointed out earlier, Romans being in Defcon 5 with no GCs created this opportunity, don't hate because we took advantage of it. :P

I am sure it is always possible to come up with some criticism on any DOW, I am sure TPC could have criticized RE's first two DOWs if we really wanted to come up with something. We didn't feel it was necessary to try to find fault with our friends actions and even if we had we would have discussed it privately, not criticize their actions on the OWF.

With regards to NEW I suggest you consider their reputation in SE, they are known as fighters...very capable fighters. I am sure if they were at all concerned with flag running in TE they could bring much more force to bear than the few NEW nations in COS.

COS is more a crucible than a training AA, it exists to test and confirm member's desire and ability to fight. After this war some may be cut, others may be promoted to TPC having proven themselves as warriors. There is no automatic pass for any member, certainly not for members of any particular SE AA and certainly not for any flag runners. Some seem to think they've uncovered some grand plan to hide flag runners in COS, all I can say is thanks for the epic lulz! :lol1:

With regard to DM - he is not in COS, he is not in TPC. We have no idea what his intentions are this round, we don't even know what nation he is. You can believe this or not, I doubt TPC or DM will care either way.

In closing I would just like to say good luck to all fighting. I thank those that support our actions and regret seeing some criticize us using distorted data. Most of all I hope that our intention to have some friendly war will not lead to hurt feelings by any involved.

Hopefully we can focus on why we are here - to have fun! B-)


/End Wall of Text

Edited by Wired
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy wall of text Batman...

Two things.

1) "Third time's a charm" remark was before I looked at anything. Was kinda busy with a blitz and a bunch of people asking, "what is going on?" I meant that maybe this time RE would end up doing more damage than it took, maybe this time we would 'win'. Not sure how you took that to mean the opposite, since you very clearly were the better performers stuck with inferior war partners the first two times (first war OP was nowhere near ready and didn't fight much, second war had many inexperienced from APC/LoSS/WAPA skewing things).

2) The stats you gave from pre-war don't really help the point you're trying to argue. In fact, the stats you posted are a pretty clear down-declare, since you list TPC with more nations than targets, more NS and ANS than targets, more nukes than targets, and an advantage in numbers in every 5k tier. Adding things up, 20k+ is 5 RE vs 7 TPC; 15k+ is even at 11-all; 10k+ is 16 RE vs 20 TPC; 5k+ is 21 RE vs 23 TPC. You have larger nations hitting smaller in each case. The only advantages for RE are one point that was already made, we can try to get help from some 5-7k nations once targets are knocked down (and not an advantage unless this thing drags out for much longer than after initial declarations expire); and your point of the SDI advantage. That doesn't even come close to balancing things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry if I took the "charm" comment the wrong way, I thought it implied the opposite of what you intended to convey. My bad.

The point I was trying to make was that pre blitz stats are a better comparison than the numbers you took post blitz. I would hope you can agree that both AAs stats before either bought up military is comparing apples to apples. I would further hope you could agree that stats taken after blitz, with one AA fully militarized and the other not, are not measuring equal positions.

With regards to 23 on 21 please note it says 21 "targets" and 23 "fighters", the assumption was some would not show for blitz and, as expected, they did not. It was also assumed that RE would have some nations grow NS quickly and expand the "targets" engaged in the first round of counters considerably. We never considered the projection of 23 on 21 to be an accurate number once actual wars were declared, it was a projection. The more realistic belief was that 25 hours into war the numbers would be closer to 20 TPC and 30 RE and that this growth would continue. At this time there are over 35 RE nations engaged.

So, similar to your point that broad stats do not represent the whole picture I would suggest blitz stats do not represent the whole war.

I can understand that from your perspective you see things differently then we do. From our perspective we see all of TPC/COS attacking your top and mid with the expectation more RE would enter the war, which they did. The closeness of the stats combined with the logical assumption that RE's larger nation count would have an impact made for a fair DOW IMO. I am sorry we can not agree on that point but I respect your position and we can simply agree to disagree.

Again, in my opinion what is important is we focus on trying to have some fun playing the game and hopefully avoid any further name calling or any other aggressive comments towards each other. B-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...