Iceknave
-
Posts
145 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Blog Comments posted by Iceknave
-
-
Clearly, you haven't been UNDERSTANDING Jesse's responses to you.
Different alliances have different NS decay rates while at war. If you used your brains at all to analyze stats, you would realize that there's a reason aside from peace mode that has resulted in differing NS decay rates of NPO and her allies.
But meh, most people don't like using their brains, so they pick one reason and stick with it, even if the response variable one is trying to measure consists of multiple explanatory variables interacting with each other.
Oh, yeah, you forgot option 4. It's called giving NPO and friends white peace. *Shrugs* We're already down 9 million NS, so it's not like we haven't been reduced, you know...
-
VE is in yellow. What does that mean exactly? Does it mean they are on both sides or ?
Also, NG, TLR and VE declared war on Apparatus December 13, 2011
Thanks for putting together this war chart. It really does make it easier to see what's going on.
-
I hate the system of tech selling.I want so bad for an alliance to grow because its members care about the alliance and not about their own nation. 1. Grow enough low tier nations to 3999 infra.2. Each low tier sends tech every 10 days / 250-300 per month3. Each top tier nation should be getting 900 tech per month. Have large nations so they don't have to go to peace mode in every war. Have a system that will replace that tech quickly so that those large nations don't have to hide in peace mode during war time.It's really not a matter of giving Admin suggestions to fix the game. An alliance or even a bloc should be having all 3999 or so nations sending tech to all large nations. In a war you're going to have your hands full at the top tier or it will be you that enemies worry about. Alliances or Blocs should be building as many 100k NS, 8k-10k+ tech nations as they can. Tech deals suck. Have it be automatic where large nations only receive tech and tech bankers send tech.
Considering you're not a very large nation, I'm actually quite puzzled why you hold the opinion you do.
In order to fill 6 upper tier nation's slots pretty much non-stop, you need 6 nations willing to pay for the tech to fill ALL 6 of their slots (I'm assuming for those 6 nations that they've gotten a DRA already to simplify things in the discussion, but that's being idealistic as practically most tech sellers will have only 5). How many tech selling nations do you know of are willing to spend 5 to 6 million of their own money every 10 days to send 250 to 300 tech to another nation with no obvious immediate personal gain? *Hint* It's not a whole lot of nations.
That's the first problem, no immediate payoff for the tech sender. Even if you had the "mid" tier send cash to pay for the tech for an upper tier nation (assuming "mid" tier is at a good tech level for war), that increases the number of "low" tier nations 2 fold (at the current prices of 3 million/50 tech) to fill the slots of an "upper" tier nation. This gives you a sub issue to the first problem. Lack of willing people to basically sacrifice themselves for the "benefit" of the alliance.
Problem number 2, for your average tech seller that actually does burn their own cash for tech dealing, 5 to 6 million is a decent amount of cash to be spending from their own pocket (around 2 days income for a nation at 4k infra with no wonders, but for a smaller nation, the loss in income can be much, much greater). I'm talking nations that don't have the wonders to boost their income big time like mine, but younger nations who have no wonders and the population boost from wonders for more improvements for even greater income. In a 20 day cycle, that's at least 4 days of their own collections that goes to dumping tech onto someone for no benefit to them. That's before considering the costs of labor camp swapping.
Problem number 3, once a nation acquires a MP, the question of getting tech becomes an important issue for said nations to consider. In the event of war, with their low tech levels, they will be at an extreme disadvantage, the higher up they go in infra (and the economic benefits of tech dealing at higher infra levels also begins to make itself apparent via the loss in collection income and increase in infra bills).
-
If I understand the gibberish he's saying correctly, start with the quote:
"To win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.-Sun Tsu"
From there, move onto the next part:
"In the last conflict, I believe the the NPO had reached an accommodation with allies and would not enter (which would have fulfilled the second sentence of the quote above)..." BUT
"... Doomhouse preemptively strikes throwing the pinnacle of strategic and tactical victory overboard for mere victory. Now they brag about a victory of bigger pixels when the other would have been a legend (countering the second sentence and "fulfilling" the first sentence."
Therefore, the conclusion of the OP seems to be an attempt to convey that DH in the DH-NPO war had already won without firing a single shot, BUT ruined their complete and skillful victory by attacking preemptively, leading to a less skillful victory.
-
Millions of NS would work quite well. It would be easier for people to understand. Considering most of us are Western natives (and not Chinese), our counting system/thought process doesn't work too well with 10k as a counting unit (ie, if someone said 500 ten-thousand, people would have to take an extra 30 seconds or whip out a calculator to understand it's the same thing as 5 million). In Chinese, however, 10k can be used as a "counting unit", since there's a "word" that means exactly 10k (万, pronounced wan) and another "word" that means 1k (千, pronounced qian). The 10k as a "counting unit" is pretty weird and out of the norm for the West.
Your axis would run from around let's say 3.00 million to around 17.00 million and that's not too bad design wise.
-
NOW STA has that. We left them with 1 nation at 71K (who refused to leave pm and has since been ejected and deleted) and no one else above 40K. All these nations have rebuilt to have 1 nation above 40K. Also STA had 95+ nations at the time of surrender. So roughly 1% of their nations were above 40K
Just FYI.
Thank you for that little nugget of information. That makes things worse for STA, meaning no upper tier at all at all by the end of the war.
The war also started on the 17th for NpO, not the 24th.
Sorry for that little mixup. I've double checked my post and adjusted the stats accordingly for both NpO and STA (had the wrong dates for both of them).
-
NPO compared to other alliances has been damaged substantially less and the fact that they have been able to keep much of their NS in pm for the entirety of the war makes it hard to say that they've been definitively defeated.
Losing nearly 60% (and rising) of NPO's pre-war NS is substantially LESS damage than other alliances? You mentioned NpO and STA. Fine, let's look at them. From in game alliance charts.
NpO was at 3,515,451 on the day of their surrender March 13. They had 12,276,123 on January 17 (data from Henry's link) before the war started. [sorry, used data from the wrong date for NpO and STA. Fixed)
(Pre-war Stats - Post War Stats)/Pre-war Stats = (12,276,123 - 3,515,451)/12,276,123 = 71.36% loss in NS.
STA was at 1,497,913 on the day of their surrender March 11. They had 4,617,519 on January 20 (day VE declared war on STA) (data from Henry's link) before the war started.
(Pre-war Stats - Post War Stats)/Pre-war Stats = (4617519 - 1,497,913)/4,617,519 = 67.56 loss in NS.
Now, let's comparing that to NPO's stats:
Pre-war Stats: 16655484
Stats Now: 6,684,521
(Pre-war Stats - Post War Stats)/Pre-war Stats = (16,655,484 - 6,684,521)/16655484 = 59.86% loss in NS.
Of the 2 alliances you mentioned and NPO, NpO has suffered the most loss in NS with a difference of about 11.5% more than NPO at this time. Averaging out the losses by STA and NpO, that's an averaged percent loss in NS of 69.46%, a ~9.6% difference from NPO's loss. Sorry for the screwups in using the wrong data points.
Now, what does that ~10% in NS difference mean for NPO exactly? It would mean for NPO to match the averaged losses of NpO and STA, NPO would need to hit 4,996,645 NS, a difference of 1,687,876 NS, about the same as ZI/ZT/ZL the top 16 or so nations in NPO or slightly more practically, something like the top 20 or so would need to be flatten at war (since getting ZT for some of them would definitely take too long), or even more practically, more or less ZI/ZT'ing the top ~90 to 100 NPO nations currently in war mode (give or take, which is roughly ~1/3 of the alliance in war mode right now). This makes no adjustments for higher NS nations in peace mode for whatever reason.
Is it even doable? Considering that on the low end of the top 100 NPO nations in war mode sitting at around ~3.5k NS or so (top end ~30k NS),
Again, sorry for the screw up in numbers.
You are likely to make the claim that NPO has stuck their "upper tier" in peace mode the whole time and hence as an alliance, they have not "suffered" as much as STA and NpO. Fine, let's take a look at this claim as well.
NPO has 27 members right now above 70k NS (within the definition that upper tier = 70k NS or higher) with a member count of around 500. Based on member counts alone, NPO has an upper tier to alliance ratio of 5.4%. If we modify the definition to 50k NS or higher, NPO has 42 members above 50k NS, a ratio of 8.4%
NpO has 7 members above 70k NS at this time with a member count of around 336. Based on member counts alone, NpO has an upper tier to alliance ratio of 2.1%. NpO has 17 members above 50k NS, a ratio of 5.1%.
STA has 2 members above 70k NS at this time with a member count of around 86. Based on member counts alone, STA has an upper tier to alliance ratio of 2.3%. STA has 5 members above 50k NS, a ratio of 5.8%.
Without taking events that have taken place in the recent past (ie, within the last year or so), it looks like NPO has a "bigger" upper tier compared to NpO and STA. HOWEVER, this does not consider that back near the beginning of 2010, both NpO and STA were involved in Bipolar that ended at around April 2010 while NPO was not. How long would you say it takes to build/rebuild a nation up to 70 to 80k NS, the bare minimum that some have suggested as the limit for being upper tier? A year? A year and a half? 2 years?
When your transcript makes you think of Neutrals and the Woodstock Massacre.
in Confessions of an Operative
A blog by KahlanRahl in General
Posted
Yup, same. It's also kinda of creepy how skills I've learned in playing CN carry over into RL.
Ie, how to deal and manage people in CN directly carries into RL....
You learn things a LOT faster in CN with no consequences. Plus, since people are generally less inhibited, it's a LOT easier to know what's "wrong" and what's right.