Master Hakai Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 So Uh Bored is KILLIN it, holy crap! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopherbashi Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 So I've had this internal criteria on how I rate alliances. I'm not going to release the exact formula to keep it pure (since there would be ways to 'boost' numbers if you really cared about this value -- like MI6 is doing this war :P ). But it takes into account: Â I'm not quite sure we're doing anything special to "boost" our numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown Smurf Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014  I'm not quite sure we're doing anything special to "boost" our numbers.  Uhh I was referring to how some of your nuke turrets are buying to 1k infra, buying 4 nukes (before/after update) and then selling all the infra off. Helps damage ratios since it stops the other side from statistically doing damage to you but it actually (obviously) is detrimental to your war effort (uses more WC than necessary) and doesn't really allow you to win GAs. Won't somebody think of the casualty count!?!? But seriously, OOC, I honestly don't have a problem with it. The propaganda value of the move/PR value of doing well in a war is definitely the best move for Mi6 at this juncture. I respect the move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imran Ehsan Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014  Uhh I was referring to how some of your nuke turrets are buying to 1k infra, buying 4 nukes (before/after update) and then selling all the infra off. Helps damage ratios since it stops the other side from statistically doing damage to you but it actually (obviously) is detrimental to your war effort (uses more WC than necessary) and doesn't really allow you to win GAs. Won't somebody think of the casualty count!?!? But seriously, OOC, I honestly don't have a problem with it. The propaganda value of the move/PR value of doing well in a war is definitely the best move for Mi6 at this juncture. I respect the move.  lol..yeah. Sparta is doing that too. New tactics brought about by the emphasis on damage stats I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 (edited) No one I'm aware of is doing that Smurf -- perhaps you've forgotten pretty much our entire alliance not in peace mode is being nuked daily :mad:Â Â -- as evidenced in taking a considerable amount of damage when taken in context with our alliance size vis-a-vis our coalition. If they are you're right -- that would be dumb! Still can't see anyone in particular that would've caught your eye. Â When you factor in planes and Cruise missiles it's very easy to see 2-300 infrastructure at the 1k level go missing very quickly, especially if you're only re-buying infrastructure every other update. Â I can tell you that unfortunately the last couple VE folks who were sent knew what they were doing -- and going over the battle log you can get a nice run down of the above scenario if you wish. Â Source: My nation, and the one I'm sitting. Edited December 30, 2014 by IYIyTh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 (edited) Additionally -- with regard to rebuying nukes every-other before/after update -- it's a warchest saver, not a warchest depleting action (I don't really honestly know how you figured that.) Plus, who really wants to be up every update? Â The amount to buy infra in one fell swoop from 600-1k infra is far cheaper than buying from 800-1k twice, nevermind the game mechanic limitation of damage which minimizes damage taken due to less infrastructure being on hand on the decline. Â You can also buy troops at the lower level -- have them nuked off and avoid a defeat alert entirely. Â When you're in 3 defensive wars like most of our coalition -- this comes in quite handy when you have trigger happy opponents as you also avoid a costly defeat alert versus potentially up to 6 lost ground attacks. Â Does having so little infrastructure help damage ratios when 4-5k infrastructure no SDI opponents declare war on you? Absolutely -- but that's nothing new. Edited December 30, 2014 by IYIyTh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imran Ehsan Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 I dont know about MI6, but Hellas of Sparta is definitely doing it. He is in a rush to sell off infra at update right after buying nukes. We have been trying to get air strikes at him while he is selling infra... :v: Â Instead of buying up infra so he can help the TOP guy who is putting up a good fight or his Spartan mate who is also not turtling but is pretty incompetent, Hellas is too busy trying to have a slightly good damage ratio. Misplaced priorities? I would say so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 I dont know about MI6, but Hellas of Sparta is definitely doing it. He is in a rush to sell off infra at update right after buying nukes. We have been trying to get air strikes at him while he is selling infra... :v: Â Instead of buying up infra so he can help the TOP guy who is putting up a good fight or his Spartan mate who is also not turtling but is pretty incompetent, Hellas is too busy trying to have a slightly good damage ratio. Misplaced priorities? I would say so. Â I would imagine Hellas having 12k tech and 0 infra is quite a different situation than the one Smurf was suggesting above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopherbashi Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 (edited) Uhh I was referring to how some of your nuke turrets are buying to 1k infra, buying 4 nukes (before/after update) and then selling all the infra off. Helps damage ratios since it stops the other side from statistically doing damage to you but it actually (obviously) is detrimental to your war effort (uses more WC than necessary) and doesn't really allow you to win GAs. Won't somebody think of the casualty count!?!? But seriously, OOC, I honestly don't have a problem with it. The propaganda value of the move/PR value of doing well in a war is definitely the best move for Mi6 at this juncture. I respect the move.  I don't personally know of anyone doing that, though I suppose it's possible some people are doing that of their own accord. We've only got 2 people with any substantial tech at ZI right now (and only 3 more between there and 600 infra), though one of those does happen to be our MoD. It's certainly not anything happening en masse throughout the alliance. (As a sidenote, I saw another interesting strategy from one of my opponents, where he (presumably) bought however much infra he needed to get to 40k soldiers, and then sold down to exactly 1k infra. I don't pretend to know the benefit of only selling down to 1k rather than everything once he's bought nukes.) Edited December 30, 2014 by Gopherbashi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Williambonney Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 I remember an exploit to updeclare by declaring on a nation in range, max deploying tanks and then buying max tanks again, and then declaring on the intended target. Fun times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killjoy123 Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014  Uhh I was referring to how some of your nuke turrets are buying to 1k infra, buying 4 nukes (before/after update) and then selling all the infra off. Helps damage ratios since it stops the other side from statistically doing damage to you but it actually (obviously) is detrimental to your war effort (uses more WC than necessary) and doesn't really allow you to win GAs. Won't somebody think of the casualty count!?!? But seriously, OOC, I honestly don't have a problem with it. The propaganda value of the move/PR value of doing well in a war is definitely the best move for Mi6 at this juncture. I respect the move. Wow you are terrible sometimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 It's not just Smurf saying that, it's a fairly consistent rumor floating around our coalition. I didnt care enough to validate it :/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 (edited) It's not just Smurf saying that, it's a fairly consistent rumor floating around our coalition. I didnt care enough to validate it :/ Â Quite an interesting if not desperate rumor to start is all. Â Just not sure if I'd be able to promulgate it with a straight face, with as Gopher mentioned only 5 members of our alliance actually being capable of doing with so far 0 instances of it happening that I've seen. IMO still doesn't make sense in explaining damage discrepancy rather than the inevitable fall due to the game mechanics of sending 3-5k ns nations without an SDI against nuclear ones when declaring multiple wars on one target. Â If I were wanting to explain the disparity I'd probably start a rumor as to the latter being the cause, but this " widespread rumor," version is definitely more entertaining to me. Â Y'all have some chatty cathy's. Edited December 30, 2014 by IYIyTh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014  Quite a desperate rumor to start is all, though I can certainly see why some would be motivated to do it. I can't even remember where i heard it to be honest, i just remember thinking that it would be a cute trick to limit damage taken :/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 MI6 is putting up a fight, don't care what the stats are saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahenshah Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 (edited) MI6 is putting up a fight, don't care what the stats are saying. Pretty much this if you put this in the relative context of alliances that constitute our front. They arent here just for the token defense. Edited December 30, 2014 by shahenshah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 MI6 is putting up a fight, don't care what the stats are saying. Errr the stats actually do say that... Some people are trying to discredit their stats by claiming they are selling infra after rebuying nukes to reduce damage taken. I have no idea if thats true or not, as per my earlier posts. Personally though i expected Mi6 to do well based on their showing last war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimaera Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 I'm aware of one nation doing it once - and I promptly yelled at him for doing so, and it hasn't been done again. Â You can ask Dhruv, he'd admit to doing it one day maybe two weeks ago or so. Â So you can add that 3k NS of infra to our opponents' damage total, if you'd like. Â Nobody else is doing it. Â We buy up to 1k infra to rebuy nukes when knocked below it, like anyone else. Â We cycle PM, like anyone else. Â We won't have 100% military participation in this war - hell, we're missing some of our bigs guys or really good ratios/notoriously good fighters from combat because using them doesn't make sense after their last major engagement. Â Â We've got a couple bad eggs (Hello, Goose's -50k damage ratio!) and one particularly glaring inactive. Â Other than that, my guys came to fight. Â Proud of 'em, especially since we did *just* have another war. Â Anyone accusing us of blowing an extra hundreds of millions of rebuilding money across our alliance as a whole to pad our damn war stats is either intentionally deceiving people in an attempt to discredit our war performance (and I'll admit, it doesn't fit with the the MI6 is Terrible and Chim is Evil plot line everyone wants to reference) or is an absolute fool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerschbs Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 Less posting, more nuking. We'll never pass ODN this way! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CubaQuerida Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 Argent looks too low. Classic! Â Subtle and predictable, but no less brilliant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopherbashi Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 I'm aware of one nation doing it once - and I promptly yelled at him for doing so, and it hasn't been done again. Â You can ask Dhruv, he'd admit to doing it one day maybe two weeks ago or so. Â He was the other nation at ZI who's not Gibs when I checked last night so he might be doing it again (or he might've just got attacked and hadn't rebuilt yet). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salsabeast1 Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 As MI6's 005(MoFA) I would like to pad our stats as much as I possibly could, but to sell the infra down to save stats is a pathetic and dishonorable move. I've had to rebuy to 1000 infra daily for at least 2 weeks now and every single day I let my opponents destroy it all. Ask any single one of them. I'm turtling so selling the infra to save stats makes sense, but I'm not a coward.  http://www.cybernations.net/search_wars.asp?search=431112&Extended=1  Kudos to Umb/IRON/VE for fighting as hard as they could, everybody is giving it all they got and it's been a very enjoyable war. My favorite one yet for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EViL0nE Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 (edited) I'm turtling so selling the infra to save stats makes sense, but I'm not a coward.  If you're turtling, it also makes financial sense to sell your infra back to 0.  I'm not sure how much money you get back by selling, and if you have a reasonable WC it's all pennies anyway, but from a black and white comparison it makes sense (or cents).  Edit:  That's not to say I'm advocating either way.  Just pointing out that getting *some* money back in the case of selling it is better for your surplus than letting your opponents destroy it. Edited December 30, 2014 by EViL0nE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auctor Posted December 31, 2014 Report Share Posted December 31, 2014 Didn't a bunch of MI6's upper tier guys sell a bunch of infra to drop out of the top 250 ranks? Seems weird to make a distinction between the last 1k and 14k down to 8k. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killjoy123 Posted December 31, 2014 Report Share Posted December 31, 2014 Nope. We haven't had a top 250 nation ever(?). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.