hartfw Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 DBDC just said that o ya baby was on his own HOW DOES THAT EQUATE TO CUBA SUFFERING? He's very empathetic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 (edited) O Ya Baby, I'm so disappointed in your target selection. Yes, but when the opponent has as much land as does o ya baby, it becomes nearly impossible to win an offensive GA against him. There's also the matter that in order to launch ground attacks, you need soldiers and tanks - which opens you up to be looted, something we'd like to prevent the enemy from doing. Jerdge (while not an official spokesman) has more or less conveyed the opinion of the GPA Ministry of Defense already, so I'll leave it at that. While personally, I want GPA to lose. I do have to ask one simple question, how many nations do you think you can throw at o ya baby before you start costing yourselves triple digit billions, all the while not dealing significant damage to him? RIA has been at war with DBDC for several months now, I can tell you that your strategy is going to do nothing to change any nation you put on O ya baby from not being able to do so a second time,(Unless you spend billions to do so, in which case, you're just weakening your position for future actions.) Edited January 3, 2015 by Mogar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrnea Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 (edited) While personally, I want GPA to lose. I do have to ask one simple question, how many nations do you think you can throw at o ya baby before you start costing yourselves triple digit billions, all the while not dealing significant damage to him? RIA has been at war with DBDC for several months now, I can tell you that your strategy is going to do nothing to change any nation you put on O ya baby from not being able to do so a second time,(Unless you spend billions to do so, in which case, you're just weakening your position for future actions.) This isn't about destroying o ya baby's pixels, though that is a favourable side-effect of the strategy we've chosen to employ.RIA doesn't have the upper tier necessary to put our strategy to work against the whole of DBDC (no offense), so the comparison isn't a valid one in the slightest.You'd be surprised how easy it is for our nations to recover to the top 250 ranks after a statistical beat-down and perhaps by how hard it is for a nation in perpetual war to keep sending successful nuke attacks daily. The GPA can afford the losses we will incur, but can a rogue like this afford (and, indeed, endure) being stuck in nuclear anarchy for the next three months? What of the next six? The next twelve? The GPA is in this for the long haul and will do what is necessary to ensure that our nations are not assailed. Edited January 3, 2015 by Arrnea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerschbs Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 (edited) O Ya Baby, I'm so disappointed in your target selection. While personally, I want GPA to lose. I do have to ask one simple question, how many nations do you think you can throw at o ya baby before you start costing yourselves triple digit billions, all the while not dealing significant damage to him? RIA has been at war with DBDC for several months now, I can tell you that your strategy is going to do nothing to change any nation you put on O ya baby from not being able to do so a second time,(Unless you spend billions to do so, in which case, you're just weakening your position for future actions.) It's GPA I'd assume they have warchests stocked up to be able to do this for a long time. It's literally the only thing they have to defend, if they aren't going to do it now why bother at all? Edit: looks like Arrnea answered that for me. Now let's see if they have the will to see it through. Edited January 3, 2015 by kerschbs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 (edited) This isn't about destroying o ya baby's pixels, though that is a favourable side-effect of the strategy we've chosen to employ. RIA doesn't have the upper tier necessary to put our strategy to work against the whole of DBDC, so the comparison isn't a valid one in the slightest. You'd be surprised how easy it is for our nations to recover to the top 250 ranks after a statistical beat-down and perhaps by how hard it is for a nation in perpetual war to keep sending successful nuke attacks daily. The GPA can afford the losses we will incur, but can a rogue like this afford (and, indeed, endure) being stuck in nuclear anarchy for the next three months? What of the next six? The next twelve? The GPA is in this for the long haul and will do what is necessary to ensure that our nations are not assailed. I doubt I'd be incredibly surprised at how large of warchests nations that don't use them can attain. I'd go check the nuclear statistics screen for Rikhard, DBDC nations have been in this position before. You can afford them short term, can you continue to do so and further weaken each nations you put upon him? To pretend like O ya Baby is going to shy away from an extended conflict, or that his warchest is not in the tens of billions and he can in fact endure this for the next forever is rather naive, to put it mildly. Will you cause another Woodstock merely to keep O ya baby at war? It's GPA I'd assume they have warchests stocked up to be able to do this for a long time. It's literally the only thing they have to defend, if they aren't going to do it now why bother at all? I also assume that putting 7 year old nations with 0 Casualties again a nation that likely can afford to rebuy max statistics generals at minimum 10 times without heavily denting his experience levels(this is assuming that GPA ever gets a successful spy operation of course, which is unlikely in the next several months at least.), is also not a very intelligent move, as someone who is somewhat of an expert at roguing, you stop rogue attacks by actually providing a threat that the rogue finds unpalatable, and I am doubting that O ya is going to be saddened to hear that GPA is going to give him targets forever with plenty of land and tech for him to destroy. It's not a question of willpower, it's a question of grasping what's occurring and reacting to it effectively, this is not the way. Edited January 3, 2015 by Mogar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrnea Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 I also assume that putting 7 year old nations with 0 Casualties again a nation that likely can afford to rebuy max statistics generals at minimum 10 times without heavily denting his experience levels(this is assuming that GPA ever gets a successful spy operation of course, which is unlikely in the next several months at least.), is also not a very intelligent move, as someone who is somewhat of an expert at roguing, you stop rogue attacks by actually providing a threat that the rogue finds unpalatable, and I am doubting that O ya is going to be saddened to hear that GPA is going to give him targets forever with plenty of land and tech for him to destroy. O ya baby mostly doesn't want to destroy tech and land, but rather to loot it - because that's how he grows.He can't do that if he's locked in nuclear anarchy fighting nations who are sitting on zero soldiers and just lobbing nukes at him.Again, we can afford the tech, infra, land and money losses. Can o ya baby afford to not be able to raid for the duration of this war that he's started?PS: What would you have suggested as an alternative strategy? That we simply roll over and let him loot as he pleases? Never going to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garion Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 The number of people salivating at the thought of those wars is too damn high. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caladin Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 I also assume that putting 7 year old nations with 0 Casualties again a nation that likely can afford to rebuy max statistics generals at minimum 10 times without heavily denting his experience levels(this is assuming that GPA ever gets a successful spy operation of course, which is unlikely in the next several months at least.), is also not a very intelligent move, as someone who is somewhat of an expert at roguing, you stop rogue attacks by actually providing a threat that the rogue finds unpalatable, and I am doubting that O ya is going to be saddened to hear that GPA is going to give him targets forever with plenty of land and tech for him to destroy. Just FYI: Prob might have 0 casualties, but he is also one of the most experienced fighters I know, having fought alongside him in TE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 (edited) DBDC just said that o ya baby was on his own HOW DOES THAT EQUATE TO CUBA SUFFERING? If he is on his own why is he still part of the DBDC AA? Edited January 3, 2015 by Tywin Lannister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saxplayer Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 If he is on his own why is he still part of the DBDC AA? He's on his own for this affair, that don't mean that he's kicked out of the AA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 He's on his own for this affair, that don't mean that he's kicked out of the AA. In other words, the probing assault backfired and DBDC backed down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown Smurf Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 Oya will win even if he surrenders. Only way GPA (or anyone else) wins is by keeping him at war after he runs out of nukes.. but people always seem to peace out relatively quickly. Even if they do keep that one ex-DBDC nation at war because of what I said, all he has to do is suicide against GPA and creates atleast 10 more raidable targets for the rest of DBDC anyways. Win-win for DBDC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 Oya will win [...] all he has to do is suicide against GPA and creates atleast 10 more raidable targets for the rest of DBDC anyways. Win-win for DBDC. Thats not going to happen if GPA keeps him staggered and in anarchy. I'm sure there are others who will be happy to help if O ya Baby drops far down enough :smug: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 Just FYI: Prob might have 0 casualties, but he is also one of the most experienced fighters I know, having fought alongside him in TE TE combat is slightly different than high tier combat. Oya will win even if he surrenders. Only way GPA (or anyone else) wins is by keeping him at war after he runs out of nukes.. but people always seem to peace out relatively quickly. Even if they do keep that one ex-DBDC nation at war because of what I said, all he has to do is suicide against GPA and creates atleast 10 more raidable targets for the rest of DBDC anyways. Win-win for DBDC. Long game, GPA loses no matter what. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabcat Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 This is grim, attacking GPA is out of order now and was out of order when NPO did it. As for the ins and outs of what the outcome of this is or what GPA should do, I don't see them having any option other than to do what they're already doing. I wish them luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerdge Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 Sorry for the short replies, my nation's long stay in Peace Mode (we cower in fear etc) left us sleepy and with second grade technology, thus the tablet I am stuck using isn't the best tool to compose lengthy replies on. :( I doubt I'd be incredibly surprised at how large of warchests nations that don't use them can attain. I'd go check the nuclear statistics screen for Rikhard, DBDC nations have been in this position before. You can afford them short term, can you continue to do so and further weaken each nations you put upon him? To pretend like O ya Baby is going to shy away from an extended conflict, or that his warchest is not in the tens of billions and he can in fact endure this for the next forever is rather naive, to put it mildly. Will you cause another Woodstock merely to keep O ya baby at war? I also assume that putting 7 year old nations with 0 Casualties again a nation that likely can afford to rebuy max statistics generals at minimum 10 times without heavily denting his experience levels(this is assuming that GPA ever gets a successful spy operation of course, which is unlikely in the next several months at least.), is also not a very intelligent move, as someone who is somewhat of an expert at roguing, you stop rogue attacks by actually providing a threat that the rogue finds unpalatable, and I am doubting that O ya is going to be saddened to hear that GPA is going to give him targets forever with plenty of land and tech for him to destroy. It's not a question of willpower, it's a question of grasping what's occurring and reacting to it effectively, this is not the way. There's no way to defend yourself without become weaker, thus we will accept becoming weaker to defend ourselves. It's simple! The goal of an effective defence for peaceful people - and we're the most peaceful of all for sure - is not to "win" as in conquer, or to destroy the aggressor (although we'd eventually "win" too, if the situation would remain stable long enough) but to remove any incentive and/or ability of the aggressor to persist a second time. We also want to show that an attack is inconvenient no matter how many attack us. We can't avoid "Woodstock 2.0" because we can't prevent people from attacking us. We can only show that any Woodstock N will be a losing adventure for everyone. The number of people salivating at the thought of those wars is too damn high. I was thinking the same thing. In other words, the probing assault backfired and DBDC backed down. Wouldn't you please leave us out of your propaganda? Many thanks in advance if you do so. TE combat is slightly different than high tier combat. Long game, GPA loses no matter what. I agree! If we lose no matter what, why leave a rogue get away with minimal damage? At least we'll deal all the damage we can. Also in general: I don't know why many are involving the whole DBDC into this. We're not at war with them and they didn't direct any complaint to us about the way we're defending ourselves. We don't even "hate" oya. He's free to do what he wants with his nation, like we're free to do the same with our ones. We even sent probablamenteno against him: it's like being countered by the soul and spirit of the GPA... A great honour and show of respect, in fact. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 0 Attacking + 0 Defending = 0 Casualties Doesn't take a single casualty to fire a nuke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Spanier Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 In other words, the probing assault backfired and DBDC backed down. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFRylztSXvE DBDC members raid, and not always in packs. When Argent was hit by a single DBDC nation awhile back it wasn't sanctioned by DBDC as a whole. Sometimes members do things on their own, you of all people should know exactly what that is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFRylztSXvE DBDC members raid, and not always in packs. When Argent was hit by a single DBDC nation awhile back it wasn't sanctioned by DBDC as a whole. Sometimes members do things on their own, you of all people should know exactly what that is. In more civilized alliances, members do not go off and raid other civilized alliances "on their own" and expect to remain a member for long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 Jerdge, the long game is after this war, there's not going to be anyone else in the upper tier besides AZTEC/IRON/DBDC, and neutrals, and while keeping o ya baby at war forever may hinder his growth, you don't shoot yourself in the stomach to shoot someone else in the foot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saxplayer Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 In more civilized alliances, members do not go off and raid other civilized alliances "on their own" and expect to remain a member for long. No one gives a care about how civilized DBDC is. They are an alliance and they are playing this game, so stop with all of this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Spanier Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 In more civilized alliances, members do not go off and raid other civilized alliances "on their own" and expect to remain a member for long. They don't do that for respect of alliance sovereignty, they do it so as to not cause an incident. Most alliances don't have the time, resources, nor patience to deal with such issues. DBDC however is rarely challenged. If an alliance can, they will. It's not a matter of being civilized or not, it's a matter of practical ability. Don't blame DBDC, blame alliances that let it happen. And for the record, Cuba handled the dispute where an Argent member was hit better than I've seen most alliances who have a wayward member raiding legitimized AA's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
im317 Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 if this is an unsanctioned attack then surly DBDC will be willing to use there senate seat to sanction this nuke rouge? either way i am glad to see you standing up for yourself and launching a counter offensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tehmina Posted January 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 if o ya is actually ZIed, I will worship GPA :p I don't think I'll have to do that though.... that proposition, no matter how much awesome it sounds is highly unlikely.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starfox101 Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 O Ya Baby, I'm so disappointed in your target selection. While personally, I want GPA to lose. I do have to ask one simple question, how many nations do you think you can throw at o ya baby before you start costing yourselves triple digit billions, all the while not dealing significant damage to him? RIA has been at war with DBDC for several months now, I can tell you that your strategy is going to do nothing to change any nation you put on O ya baby from not being able to do so a second time,(Unless you spend billions to do so, in which case, you're just weakening your position for future actions.) What war do they need to save their pixels for? May as well make a huge show of defense and deter future attacks.This is surprisingly good politics/defense from GPA. Consider me very surprised, as I didn't think you guys had a defense department or even logged in more than once every 10 days. 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.