Some-Guy Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 Wow, what happened there TOP? everyone in Karma lost about 20% of their previous strength. If i remember correctly you weren't using nukes on your opponents or being nuked in return? must of been an incredibly hard war for whoever was taking the nukes you didn't want to absorb. Not really. As most of Planet Bob knows, we entered the Karma war not to dominate oppressors but rather to defend friends in The Citadel and in Orange Unity. By not using nukes, except in retaliation (See BAPS) we were able to arbitrate rapid exit terms with minor co-belligerents (No offence intended to Invicta, UPN and OMFG) who took up valuable resources and war slots from our allies. Through our one simple act of forethought we closed three war fronts and allowed our allies to reassign war machines elsewhere. I'm proud TOP spends a few extra moments thinking about the consequences of our actions rather that mindlessly wading into war, I'm proud we were able to assist our allies and I'm proud we didn't betray our commitments in doing so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 Wow, what happened there TOP? everyone in Karma lost about 20% of their previous strength. If i remember correctly you weren't using nukes on your opponents or being nuked in return? must of been an incredibly hard war for whoever was taking the nukes you didn't want to absorb. You might wanna do some fact-checking with alliances like BAPS. It's true that TOP didn't first-strike. Invicta didn't either. We'd have been fine with not nuking Orion, and they'd have alot more NS today if they had agreed to the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Believland Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 I am just going by memory which is what I stated. I tried to get some info on it before I posted but I can't find anywhere its been recorded, I would definitely like to know which alliances you did and didnt not use nukes against though, so please go ahead and inform me. BAPS and OMFG, thought it was more but ohwell. Honestly, I don't see what the big deal is. I'm not going to tell you how to use your nukes, and I would like the same in return Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Some-Guy Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 (edited) I am just going by memory which is what I stated. I tried to get some info on it before I posted but I can't find anywhere its been recorded, I would definitely like to know which alliances you did and didnt not use nukes against though, so please go ahead and inform me. On an individual nation basis, some members from each alliance nuked TOP nations and that fire was returned. By in large, our policy with Invicta, UPN and Echelon was if they nuke a TOP nation then that nation could return fire with his squad mates. We engaged BAPS and OMFG(?) in full nuclear warfare. Edited August 16, 2009 by Some-Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Diorno Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 BAPS and OMFG, thought it was more but ohwell. Honestly, I don't see what the big deal is. I'm not going to tell you how to use your nukes, and I would like the same in return Normally yes, in a war that involved us all fighting together its a bit different. I was not on any fronts with TOP, but if you are taking up war slots on an opponent which has other Karma alliances taking up war slots, and your alliance isn't receiving any nukes from the enemy nations, all those enemy nukes that are meant for you are instead being launched at the other karma alliances. On an individual nation basis, some members from each alliance nuked TOP nations and that fire was returned.By in large, our policy with Invicta, UPN and Echelon was if they nuke a TOP nation then that nation could return fire with his squad mates. We engaged BAPS and OMFG(?) in full nuclear warfare. Invicta, UPN and Echelon were definitely notable alliances which had a lot of nukes, the war with echelon went for a long time though I know you gave them peace earlier. Did TOP keep the same enemy nations as targets or let them cycle through to the other karma alliances with all their nukes intact? Also, why exactly didn't TOP use nukes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Believland Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 Normally yes, in a war that involved us all fighting together its a bit different. I was not on any fronts with TOP, but if you are taking up war slots on an opponent which has other Karma alliances taking up war slots, and your alliance isn't receiving any nukes from the enemy nations, all those enemy nukes that are meant for you are instead being launched at the other karma alliances. No Offense, but we attacked 4-6 days after the war started. IIRC, we were the last ones to declare war on our enemies(excluding Echelon) except for TSO. If the slots weren't full by then chances are they wouldn't have been filled in the next day or two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaiser Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 Normally yes, in a war that involved us all fighting together its a bit different. I was not on any fronts with TOP, but if you are taking up war slots on an opponent which has other Karma alliances taking up war slots, and your alliance isn't receiving any nukes from the enemy nations, all those enemy nukes that are meant for you are instead being launched at the other karma alliances. We only attacked nations that after several days of war had no other nations attacking them. They weren't fighting other Karma nations when we attacked them, so any damage we did would not have been done at all if we didn't attack. We also went first strike nuking an alliance (can't remember which) that first strike nuked Umbrella, our ally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Choader Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 We only attacked nations that after several days of war had no other nations attacking them. They weren't fighting other Karma nations when we attacked them, so any damage we did would not have been done at all if we didn't attack. We also went first strike nuking an alliance (can't remember which) that first strike nuked Umbrella, our ally. Every front you entered was in support of an ally, and every front was nuclear. Are some allies just more worthy of losing infra over then others? Your policy on nuclear engagement is yours to make, but it does affect other alliances whether you thought so or not. Especially when some of your members were using up spy slots changing Defcon on enemy nations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Diorno Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Every front you entered was in support of an ally, and every front was nuclear. Are some allies just more worthy of losing infra over then others?Your policy on nuclear engagement is yours to make, but it does affect other alliances whether you thought so or not. Especially when some of your members were using up spy slots changing Defcon on enemy nations. I doubt that was TOP's fault alone. Every nation I declared on had people changing their defcon levels, I even harassed my squad to stop it and someone else was doing it. Makes it frustrating when you have a CIA and 800 spies all sitting around drinking tea while my nation gets nuked into oblivion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Some-Guy Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Also, why exactly didn't TOP use nukes? Please see: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=1778379 Normally yes, in a war that involved us all fighting together its a bit different. I was not on any fronts with TOP, but if you are taking up war slots on an opponent which has other Karma alliances taking up war slots, and your alliance isn't receiving any nukes from the enemy nations, all those enemy nukes that are meant for you are instead being launched at the other karma alliances. Firstly, consider that firstly TOP was spying away nukes that other Karma nations could not. Secondly, consider that our tactics, in my opinion at least, shortened the length of the war on the fronts that we fought in. Yes, TOP could have nuked those alliances into submission and taken some nukes in return but then perhaps such alliances would be backed into a corner and be fighting for their lives thus prolonging those fronts by days if not weeks. I think by positioning ourselves to end some fronts sooner, rather than later, we prevented more nukes falling on our allies that had we done otherwise (Case in point with BAPS). Invicta, UPN and Echelon were definitely notable alliances which had a lot of nukes, the war with echelon went for a long time though I know you gave them peace earlier. Did TOP keep the same enemy nations as targets or let them cycle through to the other karma alliances with all their nukes intact? Karma military command assigned us targets. Without hyperbole, we regularly beat down the majority of our opponents in the first war cycle beyond our abilities to redeclare, thus those targets got assigned elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiss Goodbye Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 (edited) Invicta, UPN and Echelon were definitely notable alliances which had a lot of nukes, the war with echelon went for a long time though I know you gave them peace earlier. Did TOP keep the same enemy nations as targets or let them cycle through to the other karma alliances with all their nukes intact? We mostly kept the same nations as targets, until they were entirely out of our range. We had several cycles, one of which I served, against Death666Angel, Das Vierte Reich, and various other Echelon upper tier nations. By the time they were fighting other Karma alliances, they'd lost all of their infrastructure and a surprisingly large chunk of tech. None of the nations we fought in Invicta and UPN had to face combatants from Karma after us. Ditto also for BAPS and OMFG, who as previously noted, we did nuke. The only reason this became an issue was because the war with Echelon dragged on so long that we literally had no targets left to fight. Edited August 17, 2009 by Kiss Goodbye Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seer Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 *Seer looks at the topic title. *Seer doesn't see "why didn't TOP nuke more people" there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Believland Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 *Seer looks at the topic title.*Seer doesn't see "why didn't TOP nuke more people" there. Please don't give them any ideas Anyway back on topic, Essenia may you please do this with wonders and improvements? I find these to be much more interesting than tech, nukes and NS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 We mostly kept the same nations as targets, until they were entirely out of our range. We had several cycles, one of which I served, against Death666Angel, Das Vierte Reich, and various other Echelon upper tier nations. By the time they were fighting other Karma alliances, they'd lost all of their infrastructure and a surprisingly large chunk of tech. None of the nations we fought in Invicta and UPN had to face combatants from Karma after us. Ditto also for BAPS and OMFG, who as previously noted, we did nuke. The only reason this became an issue was because the war with Echelon dragged on so long that we literally had no targets left to fight. I don't really care about the argument in general, but I fought Death666Angel after TOP was through with him. I had 80k+ NS left at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Lightning Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 *Obligatory posturing post here* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alekhine Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Uh, yes. It might be a close fight, but the Citadel alliances also have vastly better co-ordination and activity which would decisively tip the scales.MK is doing pretty well. Your allies need to start buying more tech though . Avg Tech Stats: Vanguard --- 2687.25 Mushroom Kingdom --- 2121.52 Clearly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essenia Posted August 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Avg Tech Stats:Vanguard --- 2687.25 Mushroom Kingdom --- 2121.52 Clearly. You have the same # of members as Umbrella and only 18 fewer DRAs. We have around 130 more aid slots filled than you. You present facts, but they aren't particularly relevant ones. Unless having a good amount of tech is reason to stop dealing. Anyway back on topic, Essenia may you please do this with wonders and improvements? I find these to be much more interesting than tech, nukes and NS From earlier in the thread: Citadel WRC:42+125+54+10+7=238 SDC:0+40+19+2+3=64 UHC:8+79+27+4+4=122 Frostbite: WRC:54+9+14+12=89 SDC:5+0+7+2=14 UHC:24+1+12+5=42 CnG WRC:37+23+8+7+0+1=75 SDC:1+0+4+1+0+3=8 UHC:11+7+9+5+0+4=32 SF WRC:7+12+11+9+7+22=68 SDC:0+6+4+2+4+4=20 UHC:8+6+4+11+13+17=57 Citadel vs. Others WRC: 238 vs. 232 SDC: 64 vs. 42 UHC: 122 vs. 141 I also made another thread with wonders+improvements for sanctioned alliances and Citadel. If you ask, I can do that for blocs as well (it'll take some time though). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Diorno Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Is this going to be similar to a sanction race thread? It would be interesting to see which blocs are gaining military power the quickest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essenia Posted August 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Is this going to be similar to a sanction race thread? It would be interesting to see which blocs are gaining military power the quickest. Depends on interest level. Because of the slow changing nature of these stats, the update time would be more like once every 5 days or once a week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Believland Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 I would love to see this, personally Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poobah Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Just do what any TOPer ought to do. Make Unspeakable Evil update it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alekhine Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 The point was that you made it sound like MK was leading "their circle" in terms of tech. Which is pretty false, which was all I was trying to say. I wasn't really commenting on slot usage, and I know that ours is pretty bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon De Montfort Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Normally yes, in a war that involved us all fighting together its a bit different. I was not on any fronts with TOP, but if you are taking up war slots on an opponent which has other Karma alliances taking up war slots, and your alliance isn't receiving any nukes from the enemy nations, all those enemy nukes that are meant for you are instead being launched at the other karma alliances. This maybe true in theory but not always in practice. My Echelon target was beating up on two Karma nations. He had no defensive slots filled when my squad jumped him. At the end of the first week my squad's target surrendered and resigned from Echelon. So there was no one to pass them on down. And we did this without nukes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hell Scream Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Proof that CnG are fail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janax Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 You people make my head hurt with topics like this THAT NEVER EVER GO WELL. HaySeuss Kreesto. 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.