Jump to content
  • entries
    57
  • comments
    926
  • views
    39,800

Some Quick Wartime Observations


Ashoka the Great

210 views

 Share

- The lower ranks are the place to be during war. More targets, for one thing. And, as the war drags on, that number increases.

- Government members of alliances that want to surrender (but refuse to use the word 'surrender' for some reason) may want to watch what they say in public, lest a door be slammed in their face.

- The doctrine of "we won't quit until our friends do" is noble and no one will fault you for it. However, it does have the unintended consequence of prolonging a conflict to the continued detriment of the losing side. It does far more damage than people realize.

- In the future, alliances should sign individual treaties or belong to blocs, not both. Doing both not only leads to an idiotic expansion of a conflict, it also promotes things like Nordreich and the International fighting the same common enemy, which is the foreign affairs equivalent of dividing by zero.

- It's not a real war until fools start launching suicide attacks against people who have never heard of them before.

- Bragging about casualties is rather like saying, "Hey, did you see how I hurt that guy's knee with my face?"

 Share

22 Comments


Recommended Comments

I disagree with having to choose between a bloc or individual treaties. Thats like having to choose between friends and family.

Other then that its on the mark.

Also did you see my casualties, their pretty cool :awesome:

Link to comment
- The doctrine of "we won't quit until our friends do" is noble and no one will fault you for it. However, it does have the unintended consequence of prolonging a conflict to the continued detriment of the losing side. It does far more damage than people realize.

That's not really correct, one reaches a point where the side being beaten up actually does far more damage then they receive, this is obviously dependent on them still having the money to fight.

Once you have very little infra you leak a bit of tech each day and some cash and that's about it, you can still however destroy millions worth of your opponent's Infra with each nuke, CN, air and GA wave. BAPS is currently at this juncture.

- Bragging about casualties is rather like saying, "Hey, did you see how I hurt that guy's knee with my face?"

I disagree, not all alliances are made up of Infra-hugging !@#$%cats and competition for the most casualties is fierce and can have a lot of internal prestige attached. Considering CN is full of people who want to quit war the minute they see the first nuke land on their nation, I think an alliances casualty level speaks volumes for their character.

Link to comment

- The doctrine of "we won't quit until our friends do" is noble and no one will fault you for it. However, it does have the unintended consequence of prolonging a conflict to the continued detriment of the losing side. It does far more damage than people realize.

That's not really correct, one reaches a point where the side being beaten up actually does far more damage then they receive, this is obviously dependent on them still having the money to fight.

Once you have very little infra you leak a bit of tech each day and some cash and that's about it, you can still however destroy millions worth of your opponent's Infra with each nuke, CN, air and GA wave. BAPS is currently at this juncture.

- Bragging about casualties is rather like saying, "Hey, did you see how I hurt that guy's knee with my face?"

I disagree, not all alliances are made up of Infra-hugging !@#$%cats and competition for the most casualties is fierce and can have a lot of internal prestige attached. Considering CN is full of people who want to quit war the minute they see the first nuke land on their nation, I think an alliances casualty level speaks volumes for their character.

Generally speaking, those who brag about casualties only do so because they have nothing else to brag about. It's a means for stat whores who don't have the worthwhile statistics, to brag and boast and claim they don't care about all the other aspects of the game. It's stat whoring of a different nature, those who hug infra and those who hug casualties are one in the same.

Link to comment
That's not really correct, one reaches a point where the side being beaten up actually does far more damage then they receive, this is obviously dependent on them still having the money to fight.

Once you have very little infra you leak a bit of tech each day and some cash and that's about it, you can still however destroy millions worth of your opponent's Infra with each nuke, CN, air and GA wave. BAPS is currently at this juncture.

Until the guy at ZI runs out of nukes, wich happens really quick as you can't buy nukes once you are below 1000 infra.

It's also difficult to launch ground attacks when you are at ZI, since with 0 population you can buy exactly 0 soldiers.

It's not likely either that the guy at ZI can do much damage with air waves. Like nukes, aircraft have too an infra requeriments. 1.000 infra for a full level 9 plane, and just 100 infra for a level 1 aircraft (wich doensn't have a chance against a decent air force). In addition, everyone knows that the defender of an air raid is at an advantage, and a bombing run only has a decent chance if the enemy air force has previously been depleted by a nuke, or weakened by several other waves first (for wich you need two additional pals fightning your enemy, and close coordination).

Not to mention than the winning side gets to collect taxes, and makes money, and the guy at ZI can't (and you must collect at least once in 25 days to avoid deletion).

So, all in all, it's not that big deal to be the losing side in a long war. You are getting, and kept, plummeted and you aren't really doing that much damage to the enemy once you run our of nooks.

Link to comment

Generally speaking, those who brag about casualties only do so because they have nothing else to brag about. It's a means for stat whores who don't have the worthwhile statistics, to brag and boast and claim they don't care about all the other aspects of the game. It's stat whoring of a different nature, those who hug infra and those who hug casualties are one in the same.

Exactly. Casualties are pixels too.

Link to comment
Until the guy at ZI runs out of nukes, wich happens really quick as you can't buy nukes once you are below 1000 infra.

It's also difficult to launch ground attacks when you are at ZI, since with 0 population you can buy exactly 0 soldiers.

It costs less than 4m to buy from 0 to 1000 Infra each day. Due to the diminishing returns I rarely wake up below 700 Infra which means it costs me a pittance to rebuy to 1k and restock planes and nukes. Those nukes then do @400 Infra dmg each and the Airplanes that fly in over the top of the nuke do @50 Infra dmg each. Oftentimes the target has the vast majority of his troops either at home or deployed, I can choose which I wish to attack by timing the nuke before or after the GAs, and often run 2 successful GAs.

So I can destroy 500+ Infra and 100+ Tech each day, destroying Infra in the 4k-7k Infra range which is costly to replace while copping comparatively little damage in return.

Due to enemy incompetence I just made it into PM, expect me to re-emerge with 25 nukes in a few days.

Link to comment

I agree with having to choose between a bloc or individual treaties.If it's "like having to choose between friends and family" then blood is thicker than water. Better to know where you stand then find out you're a "lesser treaty" when the time comes..

The treaty web in CN is a disaster and your idea of individual treaties or blocs should ease the pain..

Cheers ashoka :)

Link to comment

It costs less than 4m to buy from 0 to 1000 Infra each day.

Wich is much less than it takes the nuked guy from rebuilding the infra you destroyed with the nuke.

And, d'oh, you say you runned to PM? Yeah, then sure you are delivering a LOT of damage... :smug:

BTW, just remember that the guy in the 7kk-8kk range gets to collect takes and make money once in a while, while you can't.

Link to comment

Wich is much less than it takes the nuked guy from rebuilding the infra you destroyed with the nuke.

And, d'oh, you say you runned to PM? Yeah, then sure you are delivering a LOT of damage... :smug:

BTW, just remember that the guy in the 7kk-8kk range gets to collect takes and make money once in a while, while you can't.

So you think you can buy 400 Infra in the 7-8k range for less than 4m, really?

Link to comment

Wich is much less than it takes the nuked guy from rebuilding the infra you destroyed with the nuke.

And, d'oh, you say you runned to PM? Yeah, then sure you are delivering a LOT of damage... :smug:

BTW, just remember that the guy in the 7kk-8kk range gets to collect takes and make money once in a while, while you can't.

Pm is a valuable tool to rebuild nukes and collect taxs

Better to collect in PM than Nuke Anarchy

Link to comment

Pm is a valuable tool to rebuild nukes and collect taxs

Better to collect in PM than Nuke Anarchy

Better still to accept defeat and be able to collect after investing a chunk of your warchest in rebuilding the infra.

Link to comment

Better still to accept defeat and be able to collect after investing a chunk of your warchest in rebuilding the infra.

Why exactly is that better? When you get out of peace mode you will have replenished nukes, collected not in nuclear anarchy and declared new wars on the enemy.

If you surrender than you will no longer have the opportunity to nuke away the infra of the enemy.

Link to comment

Why exactly is that better? When you get out of peace mode you will have replenished nukes, collected not in nuclear anarchy and declared new wars on the enemy.

If you surrender than you will no longer have the opportunity to nuke away the infra of the enemy.

Yeah, with zero infrastructure you are collecting a hell of a money.

BTW, while your nation is engaged with mid/low range enemies (a damage that the enemy alliance can later rebuiltd with war aid, or wich in fact YOU are gonna help rebuild when they force you to pay reps), the big tops of the enemy alliance are either plummeting down the rest of your tops, or rebuilding. In any case, increasing the gap between your alliance and theirs.

Get real, people. Losing = Bad. The longer you keep fighting a lost war = Worse.

Link to comment
Losing = Bad. The longer you keep fighting a lost war = Worse.

Right now, one of the largest fronts in the war is ready to shut down. Here's what's holding it up:

- Nobody on the losing side wants to be the first to lay down their arms, even if everyone else will follow suit.

- Nobody on the losing side wants to admit they have been defeated.

- Nobody on the losing side wants to "surrender" regardless of the terms (or lack thereof).

Want to know what's going to happen? Me, too. If I had to guess, though, I'll bet that a couple of stubborn fools are going to cause another cycle's worth of destruction for hundreds of nations who are likely still wondering what the hell the fighting is all about.

Stupid.

Link to comment

Right now, one of the largest fronts in the war is ready to shut down. Here's what's holding it up:

- Nobody on the losing side wants to be the first to lay down their arms, even if everyone else will follow suit.

- Nobody on the losing side wants to admit they have been defeated.

- Nobody on the losing side wants to "surrender" regardless of the terms (or lack thereof).

Want to know what's going to happen? Me, too. If I had to guess, though, I'll bet that a couple of stubborn fools are going to cause another cycle's worth of destruction for hundreds of nations who are likely still wondering what the hell the fighting is all about.

Stupid.

Sounds familiar.

I agree with either being in a bloc of having individual treaties. Christ knows what alliances in multiple blocs are going to do though. That is beyond stupid.

Link to comment

Perhaps..an automated coup attempt at ZI that plunders treasury (war chest). Wouldn't anarchy freeze the gov't actions as well? Kinda of hard to rebuild in a real Anarchy. Just a thought from a new guy. As it stands everyone has their thumb up their butts waiting for the war to end...anything that would expedite pointless fighting just because you can would be a good thing. No?

Link to comment

Yeah, with zero infrastructure you are collecting a hell of a money.

BTW, while your nation is engaged with mid/low range enemies (a damage that the enemy alliance can later rebuiltd with war aid, or wich in fact YOU are gonna help rebuild when they force you to pay reps), the big tops of the enemy alliance are either plummeting down the rest of your tops, or rebuilding. In any case, increasing the gap between your alliance and theirs.

Get real, people. Losing = Bad. The longer you keep fighting a lost war = Worse.

You're an idiot. Law of diminishing returns in the age of the 6 and 7 figure warchest make this argument completely obsolete.

Link to comment

You're an idiot. Law of diminishing returns in the age of the 6 and 7 figure warchest make this argument completely obsolete.

you mean 9 and 10 figure war chests right ;)

Also casualties are pixel hugging but hey i like them it shows how much fun youve had seeing as anything but war is boring in this game. Sure your defending casualties show how much you been beaten up your attacking casualties show how much damage you've done as well.

Link to comment

Right now, one of the largest fronts in the war is ready to shut down. Here's what's holding it up:

- Nobody on the losing side wants to be the first to lay down their arms, even if everyone else will follow suit.

- Nobody on the losing side wants to admit they have been defeated.

- Nobody on the losing side wants to "surrender" regardless of the terms (or lack thereof).

Want to know what's going to happen? Me, too. If I had to guess, though, I'll bet that a couple of stubborn fools are going to cause another cycle's worth of destruction for hundreds of nations who are likely still wondering what the hell the fighting is all about.

Stupid.

You are completely incorrect. I will tell you what's holding it up.

On offer: You surrender for the duration of the war, we'll go dogpile someone else.

Considered acceptable: The whole front peaces out for the duration of the war or White Peace for all allowing combatants to rejoin if they wish.

As things stand never the twain will meet. The enemy is really deluded in so far as how they think Purple's morale is, and what Purple is willing to accept in terms of an exit from this war.

Having been in on the talks, I see this war running and running.

Link to comment

Having been in on the talks, I see this war running and running.

Believe it or not, my info is coming from your side of the talks. Some of the folks in there are not quite as eager as others to keep this going.

From my own limited perspective, the only thing that matters to me is that alliances that have declared war on Nordreich now admit defeat at NoR's hands. Beyond that, I don't care.

(BAPS used to be on Black, right? I guess you left after the UjW?)

Link to comment

Right now, one of the largest fronts in the war is ready to shut down. Here's what's holding it up:

- Nobody on the losing side wants to be the first to lay down their arms, even if everyone else will follow suit.

- Nobody on the losing side wants to admit they have been defeated.

- Nobody on the losing side wants to "surrender" regardless of the terms (or lack thereof).

Want to know what's going to happen? Me, too. If I had to guess, though, I'll bet that a couple of stubborn fools are going to cause another cycle's worth of destruction for hundreds of nations who are likely still wondering what the hell the fighting is all about.

Stupid.

Pretty much stupid, yep. But as you can read in your blog, the amount of denial from the losing side is spectacular, and increasing. They hold to the argument that being forced into the low tier is positive for their war effort. They even resort to pure trolling others as "idiots" for failing to see the logic in their predicament "by losing, we are winning".

We are gonna have war for a while. Until one of the leaders in the losing side gets enough and white peaces out his alliance. That will start a chain reaction and soon only a fraction of their side will remain.

Link to comment
Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...