Clash

Ah yes, n00bs. Adorable. We have another who literally didn't know HOW to peace out a war and I had to tell him, step by step. While I appreciate his enthusiasm, I messaged you both on it already.

Why would you ever think that? Your nation was 4k higher ns than mine was at wars' start and you are almost ZIed now. We utterly crushed your nation into pure turtle paste and your warchest says you won't be rebuilding very quickly either. From war start numbers y'all posted: Hellas: 281,000ns / 32 nations = 8781 avg. Warriors: 369,646ns / 53 nations = 6874 avg Difference = 1907 avg Now? Hellas: 4,548 avg Warriors: 4,138 avg Difference: 410ns Overall Hellas lost a much greater percentage of their ns and infra than we did. All kinds of talk, Hellas. All kinds. You sure don't walk the walk.

All I fought were a bunch of turtles who don't know how to fight a war and I crushed all of them. Next time find me more wars. I'm pretty sure if I hadn't found some on my own you would have down-declared all around me. How am I supposed to get casualties if my targets won't even ground attack me the last 3 days of the war? Ok not so sure I approve of the way the quote feature works these days. He got the memo too. Maybe he just doesn't like you? Your nations who down-declared enough to avoid getting nuked are rebuilding already. Let's see if the rest of you rebuild as an alliance better than you war, warchest and trade. We'll see each other again sometime soon, Hellas.

We have 620 Nations currently.

Time to update! Moi: Number of Soldiers Lost in All Wars: 98,253 Attacking + 109,584 Defending = 207,837 Casualties Casualty Rank: Ranked #5 of 620 Nations (0.81%) W00T!

I posted an example of a nation accidentally declaring war on his own alliance. A spy attack is a bit less than that, especially when they share three wars and were trying to coordinate against them. He just clicked on the wrong link. I don't know how everybody else does it, but I make our target lists with nations in teams. It helps with war coordination. Don't you? No, it certainly isn't. The argument I got from Wasso was you thought that because the two nations in question both had Fillipino names and had the same resources. Umm, so? How the hell do you get that conclusion? Only y'all get that, nobody else. It's like saying all nations from Puerto Rico are too. BTW that is the discussion that led to you guys trying resource changes, which you are apparently the last AA in TE to do. If you had been doing this since the rules were changed to allow it, you wouldn't have gone there on this. You'd know the real answer without having to make up a stupid one. War coordination, resource swaps, I honestly feel like I'm teaching y'all how to war lol I already know I am on the battlefields.

No, he's just a noob who spied the wrong nation. Those two share 3 attackers and he just got confused when trying to war coordinate. It's far from the first time this has happened and it won't be the last time. If you've been around a while, you've seen nations of the same alliance accidently declare war on each other. Here is an example from the Warriors first round ever. I had him sniveled at for trying to spy cruise missiles. *sigh* A spy attack from Defcon 2 went to Defcon 1 instead of lower. Big deal. The puppets crap from last round. The multis crap. Slot fillling crap. It just keeps going don't it?

[quote name='bombuator' timestamp='1358974437' post='3084230']So Warriors I hear you guys got a Multi... [/quote] Careful what can of worms you open up, son. You're gonna have to eat 'em. Don't surprise me Hellas has to try and [s]play[/s] lie the moderation card. Every pathetic move, every time. At least they are consistent, right? BTW, in a related stupidness, this is apparently the first war Hellas has ever tried resource changes for war, and they are only trying it because they saw we did it. Every other alliance has been using this for rounds now, ever since resources changes have been allowed. So far they are screwing it up, too. Check out wasso's nation for an example. [quote] [b]To:[/b] [url="http://tournament.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=1000011"]Clash[/url] [b] From:[/b] [url="http://tournament.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=1000001"]Alessandro[/url] [b] Date:[/b] 1/23/2013 10:03:21 AM [b]Subject: [/b]RE: Battle Report [b]Message:[/b] Actually we never chnaged resources before , and we noticed that you guys did a change , so we went for it . It's a nice new experience . [/quote] You guys suck.

Swatch you got yourself nuked by a raid, clown. Never been much of a team player have you? [quote name='Alexandros o Megas' timestamp='1358874339' post='3083768'] Once a Clash, always a Clash! It is a downdeclare! Meeh ... You have more nukes, you have more money! Meeh ... You attacked us on Monday!!! Meeh ... Lol ... Lol ... Lol ... Try something better! You asked for this and you got it! [/quote] Said it before and I'll say it again: [url="http://www.fallacyfiles.org/strawman.html"]Strawmen are stupid.[/url] Everytime.

[quote name='bombuator' timestamp='1358839472' post='3083430'] Do we have to go over the war thing again? No your's was easier because you kept more Money which our nations had to spend on fighting longer.[/quote] Pfft y'all didn't spend too much money when all the other guys can hit you with are underdog attacks. Your top nations had no one in range pretty quickly and have sat around forever just collecting nukes, 80%+ of your nukes are in your top 4 nations. About half our nations got nuked in the RE war, you guys certainly can't say that. We've been playing catch-up with the top 5% ever since. Freddy asked why we don't have as many nukes and avg ns, and that's the answer. Welp, let's see what kind of counter attack we do. It's about darn time Hellas's government grew a sack and attacked someone who wasn't an easy win, good to see. Especially on a Monday! We reserve the right to declare war on some smaller alliance(s) to give our little nations someone to fight too. We'll see how much free time I have today for that. Everybody have fun and let's get some casualties!

[quote name='Freddy' timestamp='1358835017' post='3083286'] What could possibly be the excuse for their nuke count and ANS? Certainly not war! [/quote] We did have a lot harder war than you guys did Yours was longer but against much smaller nations, thats all. Most of yours was just a big tech raid. o7 TO WARRRR!

[quote name='bombuator' timestamp='1358150141' post='3076091']so just stfu[/quote] You have skewered me with your razor-like wit! Too sexy.

[quote name='Alexandros o Megas' timestamp='1358083026' post='3075813'] 1. And what was last round first days when Warriors and TPC came on Hellas? Was n't that a downdeclare? How many nations were you? 2-1 or 3-1? Who is the hypocrite? 2. But this round Clash again the Warriors are more than us again ... and I am sure that you will cry again when we say "Hell o" to you! [/quote] 1. OMFG you are the biggest full of crap liar in this game. I put the link right there and the stats are on the the first post of the first page. We also hit TFK and Catharsis, both of which did better than Hellas. So. No. Not at all. Go look, I'll wait. Better yet, here they are now: [quote name='King James XVIII' timestamp='1349412415' post='3037534']Stats taken a half hour before blitz TPC/Warriors 74 Nations 457,479 6,182 ANS 102 nukes (12 nations) 4 over 10k 42 over 5k Hellas/Cat/TFK 75 Nations 488,502 6,513 ANS 198 (21 nations) 11 over 10k 39 over 5k [/quote] The biggest difference came that you guys had overbought on infra/nukes and understocked your warchests. You did the same at the start of this war, only the 18 nation advantage meant you got away with it. You hit TPC with 18 more nations - and you accuse that war of us having 2-1 on you? I did say HYPOCRITE. 2. Bring it.

[quote name='Eljierro' timestamp='1357994837' post='3075374']I approve the Clash logic. [quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1357886056' post='3074634'] Your higher ANS and nuke advantage clearly means this is a downdeclare.[/quote][/quote] [url="http://www.fallacyfiles.org/strawman.html"]Straw men are stupid.[/url] I went out of my way to post why I thought this could end up a loss for TFK. [quote name='Lorlax' timestamp='1357923032' post='3074792'] they have like 500 more ANS, they are outnumber more than 2 to 1... how is it a downdeclare? i am going to take it that you don't actually understand what a downdeclare actually is...[/quote] I thought you nailed it on the head right there. It was like 4700 to 4200 and the tier stuff shows about 1/3 of TFK skewing their avg NS higher than most of their nations where. TFK's median nation was nowhere near where their average nation was. Those bottom 20ish TFK nations are facing twice+ as many nations their size. Right now TFK has about 10 nations looking good and 20 nations looking to be in a lot of trouble. We actually agree on something and you STILL have to argue with me lol. Geez you suck.

[quote name='Victor Von Doom' timestamp='1358060648' post='3075765']I could see if this happened farther down the road in the round but at day 11 and neither of us being in a war yet was about as even as things could get.[/quote] I thought you did good for most of that post. It was a good point that Hellas had nukes and TPC had cash instead of nukes. Until you got to the part about this being even when you had 44 nations to their 26 or whatever the difference was. All things might be close even on a nation per nation basis that early in a round, but having 18 more nations makes this a war a lot closer to 2-1 than to 1-1. Most of my criticism of Hellas comes from their hypocrisy. Hellas' [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=114040"]NDO war last round[/url] was a pretty huge down-declare. It's pretty rare when Adude and I agree on [i]anything[/i], but Hellas brought us to it. That was not at the start of the round and Hellas had 144 more nukes than their opponents.They complain about TPC making down-declares - yet with Hellas last two declares, they make two bigger down-declares than anything TPC did last round. The hypocrisy part comes in when they cry to high heaven when wars on them are even or even up-declares. They complain about [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=113404"]this war[/url], which was an updeclare. They whined like Napa Valley about the Warriors last war against them last round, which was as even a fight as one could ask for. The difference in what Hellas preach and what they do is huge even for hypocrisy. --- The stuff on Alex vs. Dealmaster is just silly. "Fishy" has 8 top 3 TE finishes and won twice I think? There are like 18 OP guys and 18 TPC guys I'd take over anyone in Hellas any day of the week and twice on the weekends.

[quote name='Swatch0' timestamp='1358065719' post='3075778']I know right? But I think you forgot you are talking to Clash who for some reason agrees only with his actions. Best to save your energy and don't bother even replying to him, he understands nothing at all.[/quote] No one in all of TE lives under a bridge as much you do, son. In a van. Down the the river.

[quote name='Alexandros o Megas' timestamp='1357965098' post='3075255'] I like that our friend Clash finds much more interesting our war with TPC and he posts more here than at the thread of his alliance pre-arranged, friendly "war" of 2 1/2 days with RE.[/quote] If TPC hadn't decided to fight back, this war would have been the same length as ours was. Except ours was nowhere near the massive punk down-declare as yours was, of course. ...which is why TPC is fighting back in the first place, making the war longer. Just feel blessed I've got some free time to share my wisdom with you

I heart math and stats [quote name='Clash' timestamp='1357895600' post='3074681']1 x 15k (Hi Wasso!) 1 x 14.5k 1 x 14k 1 x 12 8 x 9.3k-ish avg 8 x 6.4k-ish avg - 5 x 4.8k-ish avg - 10 x 3.0k-ish avg 9 x 1.3k and under [/quote] Those 19 top nation are out of reach for TPC. The bottom nations are in some trouble. Those are the nations TPC can keep warring on and perhaps keep from growing much. TPC can keep most of them staggered all round long if they so chose. The 5 middle nations could be gotten with some more rerolls or whatever, but will be hard to get at considering what TPC is at right now. It's possible though that for the next round of wars TPC can get some nations to grow a bit and hit them. If they drag them down too, TPC will have over 50% of Hellas under their thumbs. A phyrric (sp) win at best for Hellas.

[quote name='Lorlax' timestamp='1357936230' post='3074892']As for clash... he thinks everything is a downdeclare until he is declaring war... cant even fight a war for 5 days these days i hear [/quote] I was not the one saying it was a down-declare. If NLoN and BFF coordinate together and fight back, they are going to win this war. And in your massive down-declare "pass over every legit war" if TPC hadn't had decided to fight back, your war would have gone just as long as ours did. Heck you even had first choice since you declared so early, and you picked among the weakest wars you could find. A liar and a hypocrite. So you suck twice eh?

[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1357886056' post='3074634']Your higher ANS and nuke advantage clearly means this is a downdeclare.[/quote] TFK has 6 nuke nations and 32 nukes. BFF have 2 nations and 16 nukes, and both of those are in anarchy with 5 total wars with 3 total TFK nations. NLoN had 1 nuke but it got took lol. The upper part of the war doesn't look so good for BFF and NLoN.. Look at all these lil nations! NLoN/BFF 70 nations 1 x 12.8k 1 x 11.1k: 5 x 7k+ 5 x 6k+ 9 x 5k+ 9 x 4k+ 30 nations between 2.5k and 4k TFK 32 nations: 1 x 16k 2 x 13k+ 1 x 11k 1 x 10.5k 1 x 9.3k 1 x 8.5k 5 x 6k+ 1 x 4.6k 14 between 2.2k and 3.2k All wars are by TFK at this point, but those bottom 20-25 TFK nations could in theory get swarmed. We shall see if it actually happens though. Another case where if NLoN/BFF can get the right counters in the right places, it can make a big difference and beat TFK down... but will it? Are either of those alliances organized enough for that kind of coordination, much less up for coordinating together? There are only so many TFK defenive wars slots, so a lot of NLoN/BFF are going to be sitting around doing nothing eitehr way, They were doing that anyways tho I guess.

[quote name='shirunei' timestamp='1357859298' post='3074157']Fun Fight. Til next time [/quote] It definately was indeed. Both RE and tW showed up for the dance with their best clothes on. In my internal audit of our actives, only a few of our n00bs chose not to fight. We are among the last alliances to mass recruit/accept the unaligned, sometimes you can find gems in uncut stones. Most of our core nations were all TE unligned at some point. In this war, some of our nations came in with zero war experience ever, RE broke their war cherries, and they tried awfully hard. They'll learn from this and get better. Trying hard and learning to do better is all you can fairly ask of someone in an internet game. We're keeping the ones who tried and booting the ones that didn't. I wish it could have gone a couple days longer, but that would have been a bad decison with over 2/3rds of the round left to go. Ah well.There's a long way to go. It was a very hard albeit short war. Kind of like bcortell's cranium Thanks again for a fun time, RE. Don't forget to call. ---- When we were looking for a mutual blitz war, we couldn't find one. When we gave up looking, one landed in our laps. Life is a funny place sometimes. Although unlikely the Warriors will do another war like this one turned out to be in this round, I'll leave that open anyways. I 100% don't care what anyone else has to snivel about it. Though this war was short, last round's war went the full distance and this format makes for very hard wars, from start to finish, on every day. I like tough and quality competition and will always try to find that for the alliance I lead. It also makes for very fun wars. That's been the opinion of those who have fought in them and we WILL do this again, if not this round the next. I'm well aware that some people want bitter, hate-filled, talk-a-lot-of-crap and EVERYONE MUST ACT LIKE ME dramaquests, but that's not anything the Warriors have ever looked for. Several times a round, I remind our nations to thank their opponents after every war. This is a war game. Without someone to war on, you could not war. Lotta round yet folks, I'm happy with the way ours is going Comence sniveling in 3, 2, 1...

Current Time: 1/11/2013 2:11:14 AM Hellas current ns tiers (44 nations only 4 inactive gj there Hellas): 1 x 15k (Hi Wasso!) 1 x 14.5k 1 x 14k 1 x 12 8 x 9.3k-ish avg 8 x 6.4k-ish avg 5 x 4.8k-ish avg 10 x 3.0k-ish avg 9 x 1.3k and under Interesting stratification right there. The TPC side is a lot different. 1 x 3.6k 2 x 2.9k 2 x 2.3k 2 x 1.9k 5 x 1.4k 12 below 1k One result of tier comparisons like these that is nearly every TPC ground attack is an underdog attack and nearly every Hellas ground attack is an easy win. I'd bet on a lot of cautious attacks done by Hellas this entire war. So, Hellas does twice the damage on almost all of their ground attacks than TPC does when they ground attack. The flip side is that both kinds of attacks send cash from TPC to Hellas. Which is incredibly ironic considering TPC's rep on warchesting and Hellas's rep on warchesting. Across the alliance, Hellas doesn't warchest very well, something both TPC and the Warriors saw last round and was a crucial difference in the war. Why, it's almost like financial aid in TE

[quote name='wasso' timestamp='1357858583' post='3074144']I really like how you War and do Stuff .[/quote] Number of Soldiers Lost in All Wars: 44,658 Attacking + 2,158 Defending = 46,816 Casualties Nice stats line, bro. I like how you punk down-declare. Number of Soldiers Lost in All Wars: 53,508 Attacking + 63,635 Defending = 117,143 Casualties It took me 3 days to have 250% of your casualties. Scoreboard?

God bless Komplex I do love the people who can't even read stats that are right there in-game. First we start with this, on average NS before the break in the TPC/Hellas war: [quote name='Clash' timestamp='1357556773' post='3072375']Current Time: 1/3/2013 11:33:20 PM TPC: 903 Hellas: 5122 That's before update of the day after TE came back just a couple hours before that. [/quote] tW 1/6: 370,112 1/7: 362,894 1/8: 309,338 1/9: 258,245 1/10: 237,269 (I dropped 7 nations who were inactive or didn't fight, a few more to go) 258,245 / 370,112 = 30.3% loss RE 1/6: 398,082 1/7: 394,027 1/8: 342,614 1/9: 307,922 1/10; 332,991 (RE added a nation) 307,922 / 398,082 = 22.6% loss RE had more nukes, nuke nations and spies, and that was making a difference. Double those loss numbers if this goes 5 days. I know y'all would have loved that Look at the [url="http://tournament.cybernations.net/stats_news.asp?Search=The%20Phoenix%20Cobras&SearchBy=Nation_Alliance"]nuke stats[/url] of the first part of the Hellas/TPC war, through 12/30 the last day before TE went down. At that time, 38 nuke hits for Hellas and 6 for TPC. Except for the TPC nation that got a MP somehow, the nuke screens have been all Hellas since the war originally started. The Warriors screens alone have 69 nukes landing and those are probably pretty close to even, perhaps a few more for RE. There really isn't much of a comparison.

What he said ^^^ Due to everyone else picking such wussy wars, we felt it would be a mistake to get too far behind some of them in building. In just 2 days we did a fair amount of damage to each other, albeit much of it on Stelios. It would be a mistake to get too far behind. I got 60 nations to think about for 90 days, Imma do what I think I gotta do. It's too bad this war had to come so early, I was kind of hoping it would have ended up the highlight war of the round for both alliances. The two biggest kids on the block duking it out and all that. Ah well, we shall see what happens from here. My thinks to RE for a fun war and good times had by all