[The Amazing Sanction Race]

[quote name='Gopherbashi' timestamp='1343533816' post='3016589']
[font=Courier New][b]Dave's War[/b]
July 27, 2012 - Day 44

---------------

[b][u][size=3][color=orange]Dolan[/b][/u] [/color][/size][/font][font="Courier New"]• 457.00 --> 456.54 ([color=red]-0.46[/color])
[b][color=orange]•[/color] [color=orange]Continuing Alliances[/color][/b]: 457.00 --> 456.54 ([color=red]-0.46[/color])
[b][color=orange]•[/color] [color=orange]Incoming Alliances[/color][/b]: 0.00 --> 0.00 ([color=black]+0.00[/color])
[b][color=orange]•[/color] [color=orange]Outgoing Alliances[/color][/b]: 0.00 --> 0.00 ([color=black]+0.00[/color])

[b][color=orange]•[/color] Alliances[/b]: 23
[b][color=orange]•[/color] Nation Count[/b]: 3,147 (618 in anarchy, 641 in peace)
[b][color=orange]•[/color] Nation Strength[/b]: 113,275,249
[b][color=orange]•[/color] Nuke Count[/b]: 31,236

[color=orange]•[/color] [url=http://www.cybernations.net/stats_alliance_stats_custom.asp?Alliance=Independent Republic of Orange Nations][color=orange]Independent Republic of Orange Nations[/color][/url]: 47.01 --> 47.02 ([color=green]+0.01[/color]) / -15.3% cumulative
*snip*
[/quote]

Not to beat a dead horse, but IRON isn't in war anymore, so it's throwing off stats. Is there a bug in the program or something?

[The Amazing Sanction Race]

[quote name='im317' timestamp='1343343474' post='3015896']
there isn't exactly a cap for GRL.

global radiation = (total nations hit by nukes * 300) / total nations

its peaked for this war due to the limited number of nukes you can buy although its going to have a few sharp drops when its been 30 days from a large front peacing out.
[/quote]

Actually, the theoretical maximum is 300; If X is total nations, then (X*300)/X=GRL, and X/X=1, so then you get 300.

Or there's the cap at 5, but whatever.

EDIT: This came off really snarky, and that's not how I mean it. I'm also too lazy to figure out how to word it better, so I'm leaving it that way.

Also, Gopher, IRON hasn't been at war for a few days now. I think there might be a few more still on that list, but not in the war anymore.

[The Amazing Sanction Race]

Perhaps I'm alone in thinking this, but would it make more sense to group the two wars now, or leave off the LSF war altogether? It's pretty clear to most, I think, that the LSF front isn't going to expand past what it already has. The loss to IRON's score is going to be almost exclusively caused by Sparta, or so I would hope, so the LSF front is going to generally be represented by inaccurate or misleading stats.

No biggie if nobody else agrees, just thought I'd put that out there.

[The Network Thirsts]

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1340552169' post='2994464']
I don't think you understand what irony means,
[/quote]

I'm not sure you understand what irony means; the example of irony he put forward is an excellent one.

[Peace Mode Warriors]

[quote name='jerdge' timestamp='1340149494' post='2989387']
People making peace mode jokes and callouts are doing it for a [b]reason[/b] too.

I anyway commend your post and I hope it helps to keep the debate on peace mode at a minimum.
[/quote]

You make a fair point; however, often the [b]reason[/b] is that those people think they're making a valid point that needs attention. I'm making the argument here that the vast majority of reasons for posting about peace mode are stupid ones.

Thanks for your commendation - I will be sure to have a medal made to put in my sig

[Peace Mode Warriors]

[quote name='James Dahl' timestamp='1340145000' post='2989262']
People don't have anything else to argue about, and they don't want to just be quiet so you have "lol peace mode"
[/quote]

I suppose I have too much confidence in peoples' ability to be creative about their posturing.

[Peace Mode Warriors]

So every war, people start posturing about things that the other side is doing. That's all well and good, and for forum lurkers like me, it can be awfully fun to watch, whether it's for or against you.

But can people leave the Peace Mode Warrior out of it this time?

I'm pretty sure most of us have been through this war thing before. If you haven't been paying attention at all since Karma and before, this will be news to you; everybody puts people into peace mode. Sure, an alliance 100% in peace mode is something you can poke fun at. An alliance 100% in war mode will attract attention too, on the basis that people are generally impressed by the commitment to the possibility of complete and utter destruction of an entire alliance's infrastructure. But numbers in peace mode even up towards 60% aren't exactly uncommon. Everybody knows the reasons for it too, and if you are still pointing out that your opponent has X number of people using the vaunted hippy shield, you are either behind the times or being deliberately obtuse.

For those behind the times...

1) Peace mode is often used to restock nukes and navy before returning to the fray.
2) Alliances will often keep a reserve, which occasionally exceeds the size of the main force, ready for a counterattack.
3) Some of these nations will spend most or all of the conflict in peace mode for a variety of reasons - being radically outnumbered in the upper tiers is one of them, and I imagine that for smaller alliances, the archaic idea of the dedicated bank nation still exists and is (marginally) helpful. Heck, I imagine that simply having a few members that are still very strong will help in the case of rogues.
4) Nations kept in reserve this way have, in past cases, been part of the surrender terms bargaining - let your upper tier experience a predetermined amount of war in order to avoid complete devastation.

Yes, I know that some nations simply hide in peace mode because they love their stats, or don't agree with the war, or other things that could be construed as violating the written or unwritten agreement between an alliance and its members. Those people generally are called out by their own allies, so you don't have to do it for them. But entire alliances hiding in peace mode are doing it for a [b]reason[/b], even if you don't think it's a good reason.

And frankly, it's boring to read pages upon pages of "You're in peace mode" "No, we have less people in peace mode than you" "It's a legitimate strategy" and the like. Really really boring.

So please, go ahead and posture. We all enjoy reading about it, even when it's meaningless. But the Peace Mode Warrior label has been cliche for some time now.

This has been a topic of discussion in past wars as well; just figured I'd get this started while we're all still waiting with bated breath for more war declarations so that people might actually see it.

[The Amazing Sanction Race]

[quote name='Nikita Ilyich Lenin' timestamp='1337074863' post='2967659']
Can we outsource our econ to you.
[/quote]

Roq, you should consider doing this for small alliances. Walk in, help them set up a tech program, and leave a guide behind. I don't think anyone doubts your ability to get tech running.

[The Amazing Sanction Race]

Not knowing how many streaks go on for how long, would it be possible to perhaps display all streak above a certain threshold? Or, alternatively, simply a top 3 or top 5 streaks in length? I don't get a lot of meaningful information when I just see streak updates every 5 days - that means five different updates to check to see who is on a streak right now.

[The Amazing Sanction Race]

[quote name='jerdge' timestamp='1331630016' post='2937535']
Like you needed that to get on top...

Wouldn't it be the first time, for IRON, BTW? I can't imagine another alliance which had that potential for that long, and that didn't reach it yet: I guess that such a long "delay" will just make it sweeter!

Or, I don't know, on April 1st we could announce your comeback to neutrality and the merge into the Independent Republican Agency of Nations for the Protection of Green Oranges...
[center][img]http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lh9b17fnKh1qcptm2o1_500.jpg[/img][/center]
[/quote]

Technically? I think we were ranked first right at the beginning of Karma. I'm not sure if that actually shows up in the Sanction Race, cause I'm pretty sure it was for less than a day.

And we can't go back to neutrality - we were never neutral, just independent!

[The Amazing Sanction Race]

[quote name='shahman' timestamp='1329885059' post='2925407']
I think more than once-a-week all alliance would be too much. I'm against it.

Also, I like the new format. A++
[/quote]

Both of these. Though I might be biased somewhat, given that my alliance is in the sanction race anyway :V

[The Amazing Sanction Race]

No, they won't even break 150 nations. But they will (assuming a perfect merge) get up to just over 20 score.

[Opportunity Lost]

[quote name='Velocity111' timestamp='1326768815' post='2901290']
This shouldn't necessarily detract from what you're saying, but the min NS is, in fact, zero. You just don't start off with zero NS (you start with 3) because you have 1 infra. If you are to lose that 1 infra, you will be at zero NS.
[/quote]

I think he meant score, with which there is a mathematical bottom. If he didn't, then I guess you're right

[Grudges]

I'm glad we're on the same page, Mr. Janova.

[Grudges]

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1326515924' post='2899252']
Also I'd like to address a grudge that shouldn't really exist: DR/VE. Considering Impero was willing to go in with Argent on Gre, they weren't really bad at all. It was an alliance IRON is treatied to though in a nominal sense that was blocking it.

VE is always made into the bad guy, though.
[/quote]

Does DR mean Duckroll or something else in this instance? I wasn't aware there was really a grudge there. I mean, I'm relatively indifferent to VE, with some slight negative coming from being allied to GOD, but that's a very minor thing.

[The dawn of the Iron Age]

[quote name='Krack' timestamp='1326472330' post='2898800']
Sorry, I'm not giving credit to NPO for taking a beating in Karma because (paraphrase) they were so bad they required everyone else to hate them. They were just as bad the day prior to the Karma coalition beginning to be formed. The credit goes to the people that actually formed the counter coalition. Hey, let's credit Lex Luthor for Superman's good deeds too.
[/quote]

NPO was the biggest enabler; it wasn't the man behind the curtain running the show. And in a world where the most selfless thing you can do in a non-conflict atmosphere is to send out as much aid as is possible every ten days, there needs to be something more to inspire stories worth talking about. NPO fit that bill.

If you want it phrased differently, you could say that NPO's worst enemy was its own power. That power, and the manner in which they used it, encouraged resistance over time until all that resistance snapped.

[Opportunity Lost]

[quote name='Jaiar' timestamp='1326507589' post='2899177']
Why don't you mass message Fark nations and link them to this thread?

Brehon, if your enemies are not ready for peace on whatever terms then you guys just have to keep fighting. What's the big deal? If they prolong peace then issue additional terms. But, be prepared for them to reject those terms and fight longer until it gets back to white peace. This entire situation can go in circles forever.

Fark, Spart, FAN...they are defeated when they are actually defeated and accept terms. Until then, NPO and company need to keep slugging it out. You have not won simply because you say you won. You actually have to get the surrenders or whatever. You guys will be alright so just fight on and get peace whenever it comes.
[/quote]

Wars are not fought solely with statistics and numbers. This thread is evidence of that. The "big deal" is that the longer that war goes on, the longer it takes for all parties involved to get back to the normal state of affairs, and the longer it takes for everybody to grow. You're right, Fark, Sparta, and FAN can refuse to accept surrender terms, but Brehon evidently isn't out for the complete and utter annihilation of these alliances. Besides, the only time the stalling the end of war ever helped a losing alliance was when IRON fought Grämlins, and the only reason that worked was because Grämlins was withering away and IRON managed to get favorable public opinion. The alliances fighting Fark, FAN, and Sparta are not in imminent danger of dying out. They all have many other options; one of those options is this thread.

[quote]This thread is pure propaganda. The winners want peace so they call the losers petulant children. The losers could also be called warriors. Whatever your vantage point is, is what you will choose to call the sides.[/quote]

Propaganda is a weapon of war. And remember the propaganda doesn't have to be deceitful or misleading in nature to be considered propaganda.

[Opportunity Lost]

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1326491443' post='2899043']
Honestly, the reps would have just gone to C&G instead. It was always C&G's decision to let Sparta have some and Hyp was actually concerned about Sparta not needing it as much.

edit: Hm, I remember getting all the black alliances to switch to indirect so the peace deal could go through.
[/quote]

On top of that, I know that Sparta forgave at least a portion of the reps owed them by IRON. Before Karma, I remember IRON doing similar things because those who wanted reps demanded a total amount of reps, and if IRON took a portion, we could forgive it soon afterward and lighten the load a little bit. I've never been privy to surrender negotiations, but that's what I remember hearing at the time.

[Opportunity Lost]

[quote name='Seerow' timestamp='1326478991' post='2898899']
For the entertainment of people not directly involved with the conflict, or government?


The forums need more topics like this, not less.
[/quote]

This, please. Drama is good for this game, especially fresh drama.

[Grudges]

[quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1326480855' post='2898921']
The problem with grudges is that grudges have supplanted politics for too many people. Instead of looking around for alliances that have natural points of alignment with one's own (anti-raiding, pro-raiding, optional-only, neutral, moralist, Francoism, Adminism, communist, nationalist, etc) alliance, people end up allying alliances that they have no political business being allied to. A good example is Ardus' path for VE post-reformation, as outlined in his thread "The Ardus Files" where you've got this alliance that preaches honor and whatever else VE doesn't have allied to Polaris, NPO, etc during the height of their atrocities simply so that VE can get revenge one after another on the people that declared war on them pre-disband. Now they're all evened up, but VE still doesn't embody the ideals on its state seal or letterhead in part because they don't know how anymore; the current leadership all came up in this era of sell-outism. TOP you've got allied to MK who charged them massive reps. Grämlins spent two years talking out both sides of its mouth to stick it to GGA.
[/quote]

I would venture to say, given your qualms, that if a grudge is to be held, holding that grudge shouldn't require a sacrifice of alliance values. In that case, FAN is an excellent example of a group that has a legitimate complaint against NPO and other alliances. However, that particular grudge has a bit of a stale taste to it now. Is this the third war now where FAN has gone to war with NPO? Compared to this war, where TOP and IRON have been pretty consistent about voicing displeasure for Polar and have worked to make the political environment one in which we could attack more safely. As exciting as wars are, it's usually pretty evident in the first week who's going to win. Seeing the treaty movements and watching tensions build is more exciting for me, especially the closer we get to another war.

Also, it seems like you're endorsing that alliances themselves remain stagnant and don't look for opportunity to grow and change. TOP and MK becoming allies was unexpected, but the interaction between them after BiPolar evidently made it clear to them that they could get along. If alliances can't realign from time to time, then it really will be the exact same sides fighting the exact same war over and over. The more of this realignment that occurs, the more interesting the game would become. If you would have told me a year ago IRON would be fighting on the same side of the war that Complaints and Grievances were on, I would have thought you were crazy. And yet, here we are.

[Rate the War Ability]

[quote name='Louisa' timestamp='1326224134' post='2896967']
But that is surely nonsense? After all, ut was Fark that attacked, and so they should have thought of putting people in Peace Mode before doing that, if they wanted to make a reserve force.
[/quote]

It wouldn't really improve that score much, maybe from 2 to 3 or 4. Not utilizing Peace Mode is certainly a penalty. I suppose this is the first time I'm watching a mass alliance truly go down in flames while it wasn't happening to my own, but when I try to think objectively, I have to assume that it looked about the same as when IRON would get countered by MHA, Sparta, Fark, and whoever else they cued up. Maybe I'm wrong, though.

[Rate the War Ability]

[quote name='kriekfreak' timestamp='1325933521' post='2894709']
Fark - 2 Not what I expected
[/quote]

In Fark's defense, they got dogpiled before they had any significant number in peacemode. IRON's had a bad reputation as fighters in the past for the same reason, when it was really just a numbers game that we lost. Fark just finds themself in that position this war.

As far as my own ratings go, these are heavily weighted towards performance in this war, and not necessarily "enough" weight given to the histories of war in each alliance.

Green Protection Agency - No opinion. It's been too long since war for a decent rating on these guys.
World Task Force - Again, no opinion. Not aware of any wars they've been in.
Independent Republic Of Orange Nations - Not voting, alliance bias.
Umbrella - 8, but some of that is simply through having played politics and nation-building very efficiently so that there is no longer any top tier that can stand against them alone. Without that, I'm not sure there's an appropriate measure since they haven't had any real testing this war (so far as I know)
Orange Defense Network - 6. The fight against MHA seemed a little lopsided, but not to the degree most wars are. I don't have a good measure otherwise to judge this.
New Pacific Order - 7. This number is given largely for the nation retention held in this war.
Mostly Harmless Alliance - 1. Sorry guys, but this war hit you hard, and your fall shows that.
Non Grata - 8. You guys jumped in on Fark standing to take the most damage of anyone fighting them with the possible exception of NPO. Fark, though outnumbered, has taken impressive amounts of hurt.
Sparta - 5. Agreeing with Kriek, in that there's a few too many hippies here. That said, it's a legitimate strategy, and every losing side in the history of everything has used this (except for Fark this war). If I were to reconsider this later, I might change it if (for instance) Sparta's top tier were instructed to come out for a round or two of war.
Global Alliance And Treaty Organization - 6. The only good judge I have presently is the fight with MHA, and given size, you appear to have done comparable damage with ODN.
Viridian Entente - 5. No good judge, since the winds of war sent you against much smaller alliances.
The Order Of The Paradox - 9. This is probably biased, given that they're allies, but every single nation that comes out of PM in Polar that is in TOP range is taken and knocked so far down so quickly that I don't get a chance to declare, even if they were initially above my nation strength.
Mushroom Kingdom - 6. Same reasons as with ODN and GATO.
The Last Remnants - 7. Stood to lose a lot going in against Fark, though the eventual total of numbers proved otherwise.
New Polar Order - 2. Not as bad as MHA, I don't think, but you guys got locked down really quickly in the upper ranges.
Nordreich - 7. It may not have been at huge risk, but you guys did declare on more than one alliance of relatively large size, which quite a few alliances did not do this war.
The Democratic Order - Can't say, there's been no war. In the past, I might have ranked them absolute bottom because of the influx of war refugees, but that didn't appear to happen this time.
The Legion - Based on the NSO war, perhaps a 4? I'm not really sure. Nothing for this war.
FOK - 7. It seemed pretty clear to me that there was a very clear goal going into war, and the speed at which you accomplished that goal is worth commending.
RnR - 4. Going by general SF losses, not too well. Going by RnR's wars, a little better.
The Phoenix Federation - 6. No real opinion, but we generally hear about bad fighters and I haven't heard anything this war.
Fark - 4, despite my reasoning above. I wouldn't rate so low as a 2 as I imagine that against an evenly matched opponent statistically, Fark would do fairly well, but this war turned against them.
NATO - 6? Fighting against FAN, I guess. As with TPF, no real opinion.
Nusantara Elite Warriors - 8. Jumped right in the thick of things and is still fighting.
The Templar Knights - Not going to rate this one, as their war almost didn't happen at all.
Ragnarok - 6. Led a successful campaign against CSN.
Valhalla - 8, same reason as with NEW.
Goon Order Of Oppression Negligence And Sadism - 7. Willing to declare across multiple alliances to help out always helps.
Deinos - Kudos for growth, but no rating from me in this thread for that.
Legacy - 6, with RoK.
Argent - 8. As the third alliance (in strength) on this list to declare on Sparta, the effort was there, and Sparta hasn't exactly prospered this war.
Multicolored Cross-X Alliance - 3 for not losing too many members this war.
The Foreign Division - Didn't fight, no number.
Green Old Party - N/A
The Grand Lodge Of Freemasons - 6. Helpful against the STA.
LoSS - 5. Lost a fair amount in the SF front, but seemed to deal out lots of damage, too.
Fellowship Of Elite Allied Republics - 7. Deliberate bloc versus bloc warfare seems like a cool idea.
The International - 5. Declared up in strength, though with lots of allies.
The Imperial Order - 6. Props here for wedging between Sparta and Fark, even though both are occupied.
Coalition Of Royal Allied Powers - Didn't fight.

[The Amazing Sanction Race]

[quote name='Great Lord Moth' timestamp='1325060143' post='2887874']
What GOP is doing with the Sanction Race. If I made that dream alliance of mine, my goal would be to do it with ten or fewer members. @.@
[/quote]

Well, with the current score at the bottom, each nation would need to be worth 1.13 score or so. I'm not sure of how much NS that is, but it's a lot.

[The Amazing Sanction Race]

I appreciate the discussion, and I find it interesting, but would it be possible to start another topic for it? It's just treading that line between statistics and politics and I'd rather come here for the stats and posts like the ones we're getting from Deinos.

[The Amazing Sanction Race]

[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1323740887' post='2875893']
Yeah, in percentage terms, my guess would be that the First Great War far surpassed any other conflict in terms of alliances and nation strength involved (albeit some alliances' involvement was short-lived). There were very few alliances untouched by that war.
[/quote]

As I recall, it was essentially IRON and GPA, and I know that IRON always had members leaving to fight in the Great Wars. It's not a direct source of damage, but it still puts a little more NS on the fighting table.