IYIyTh
-
Posts
4,457 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by IYIyTh
-
Unfortunately this is one of those few times Blue is right.
-
SITTINGDUCK GARDENPOND aka doombird doomcave
IYIyTh replied to christian trojans's topic in World Affairs (IC)
Well, this is very interesting. -
http://www.twitch.tv/chimaera717 We are streaming live!! Come watch Salajol be caught! Will Carter evolve tonight? Does he have enough infrastructure?
-
This isn't the case though. From my personal experience even in prolonged conflicts this actually is far from being an exception, let alone the norm. For instance, it's far more likely that the Polaris "Super Wonder/Improvement," (SWI) nations will be able to get off offensive wars against nations with significantly more than 3-4k infra. As more make their way to the bottom the problem compounds itself. In order to meet the race to the bottom, an opposing coalition might unnaturally harm their nations by selling off infra, or the like in order to get in range -- but with significant warchests the longer the conflict goes the farther it is actually tipped in alliance like Polaris' favor, as far as cost and lost growth goes. The damage done at the lower tier may seem relatively meaningless and inflated but not all of it is accounted by the minority of nations Polaris is engaged with who fit the criteria of being a similar build to those who hit them. While people may counter that the cost of sustaining such a conflict wouldn't be worth it to Polaris, the cost that it is inflicting on the remaining combatants is hardly insignificant from a time/dollars/cents perspective. Each day other alliances rebuild or remain un-engaged having wrapped up their front represents additional opportunity cost to their enemies. Interesting subject, is all.
-
Doesn't that go both ways? The difference is a nation with 1k infra can easily melt off nations with 4-6k infra (much more valuable in terms of cost,) in a single round. There is a cost efficiency involved, as well as the fact that most people don't efficiently re-build their nations -- causing direct and indirect damage due to lost growth/tech potential. Heavy wonder/improvement laden nations in the sub 30k ns range are a significant challenge in a prolonged conflict.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qvm1mMC1m-I#t=69 Until tomorrow listen to gopher's song.
-
SORRY TO INTERRUPT THIS BROADCAST, DUE TO TECHNICAL FAILURES DIFFULTIES WITHO UR STREAM WE WILL RECONVENE TOMORROW
-
close
-
http://www.twitch.tv/chimaera717 Tonight, MI6 invites you to play along in an edition of Pokemon FIRERED. Please join us in a night of fun. As always -- Remember the following words of wisdom: What is boiled may never be steamed - But steeps again, stronger and warmer.
-
Pretty much this. Regardless of the validity/invalidity of the blowhard comment, that's more of a subjective perception of an alliance more than an objective measure of worth.
-
It's kind of a joke to claim MI6 is even in the top 50 of worst alliances, all things considered. If you want to vent your IC dislike of an alliance, there are better and less obvious ways of doing it than suggesting a rather wildly successful alliance is one of the worst of all time (all things considered: despite a relatively short existence -- high activity/staying power, major role in two of the last biggest wars, great performances in each, the infamy/notoriety/impressive lineup of its members, the IC controversy /entertainment it has provided as opposed to the OOC dickery of some alliances of the past -- etc.) The idea that alliances are afraid of losing wars is the sad state of affairs in CN. People will ditch allies, hell, even hit them or refrain from entering at all for the fear of losing a war and/or losing some pixels. I'm glad I'm in an alliance of only 80 that can take a hit (or knife in the back,) from some of the largest and most respected war machines this game has to offer, hold its own and then dust it off in a few months when others might be set back years. I can't imagine wanting to be anywhere else. Other than that I don't care about this thread. You get no juice.
-
A Final Act of Destruction
IYIyTh replied to Das Blitzkrieger's topic in Alliance Announcements (IC)
We know what you did, Bassman. I'm just glad you ended up where you belong. If I were you I'd rather not talk about it. To the friends I had in DoD -- best of luck moving forward. -
Hey these missiles don't make themselves. :(( How are we going to pay for your foreign wars chimaera. If I have to give up my alcohol habit we're going to have problems.
-
Some good fighting, VE.
-
Congratulations, STA.
-
A message from the Usurper: Nordreich Coup d'état
IYIyTh replied to Nemhauser's topic in Alliance Announcements (IC)
Well, this is certainly a topic. -
Now we just need Morgan Freeman or Neil DeGrasse Tyson to narrate.
-
Damage ratios are actually very accurate representation of military acumen provided the correct context is applied.
-
We'll catch you now ODN
-
Oh my this was deliciously entertaining.
-
Uh huh :)
-
It appears Schat decided to stop paying attention to CN over the past few months.
-
Poor Kain, when/if this war ends we shall ascend to our rightful place above NSO (Just like in AoE, suck it Joe/Rabo.)
-
An interesting question.
-
To be fair, your entire alliance has done this against us. It's at least privately accepted as a standard tactic to maximize the monetary value of damage while reducing damage taken.
