Sarkin
-
Posts
545 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Sarkin
-
-
Whoa hey I thought we agreed that you guys would sit out the war to solidify AZTEC's ~~~stats~~~
-
Busy folks! Good luck!
-
Kudos to everyone involved. My allies who fought TSC sounded like they enjoyed it and getting to know their opponents.
-
why don't you come out of peace mode and say that
Now you listen here, just because they declared war with 53.7% of their nations and 67.1% of their NS in peace mode doesn't mean that they're not serious about this!
I mean, sure, that's a higher percentage of nations than five of seven Aftermath alliances, admittedly. Fourth highest of any alliance in their coalition, trailing only SWF (66.7%), NADC (55.7%) and CCC (54.6%), but what does that matter? Nothing, I'm sure.
-
Ahahahaha, so now Aurora Borealis isn't allowed to fight RIA, either? Your alliance declared war on us.
RIA is going to fight me. Right now. You don't have a choice. If you didn't have such a terrible warchest, I would tell you to get up to my level. Instead, I'm going to fight my way down to yours.
-
Good to fight alongside you once more, GLoF.
-
You're the best guys :wub: Overlord sarkin must be pleased.
Why yes, I am.
-
I'd have declared more wars but everyone in range of me already had their slots full from Polar or is in peace mode, as is the case with most of our alliance,
Inaccurate, Er the Fallen was also in range and had open defensive slots
I'll grant that RIA has a large enough mid-tier that you could not have maxed out slots with all of them on AB nations or anything like that, but it's absurd to say that the best you could muster was 11 wars in 24 hours.
We had five nations in peace mode and Polar only counter-declared five wars by the time of your declaration. Excluding the five nations out of your range, this means that you had 30 nations in range with a total of 85 open defensive slots. You managed 11 wars with a 59 member alliance. That is terrible. But, you do have an excuse...
we're also expected to be countered heavily, so hurling ourselves neckdeep into a war before being countered probably isn't the most logical choice.
What's funny is, AB knew that we would be countered as well when we hit Polar, because we weren't as well-connected as most of the other alliances involved in terms of conflicting treaties with the opposing coalition. Nevertheless, we still made an actual effort. I won't debate tactics with you, but it really does feel as though you could have tried a little harder, especially when only four of those eleven wars were actually on nations fighting Polar.
It must have been difficult to sit out the past three global wars while buying tech.
It must be difficult to read the CN wiki, since you clearly haven't bothered. If you had, you'd see that we fought in Equilibrium. And yes, we were one of the alliances that did actually fight proto-DBDC.
If you were referring specifically to Disorder, then yes, that's exactly what Aurora Borealis did because we had absolutely zero stakes in that particular conflict.
We also have far more in the lower tiers and mid tier who face the same problem as those top 4 nations you have, there's simply nobody in range
Well, there are admittedly fewer open defensive slots since Sparta came in, but it's still the case that only seven of our 40 members actually have all of their defensive slots occupied.
I would suggest building your arguments with data instead of conjecture and old assumptions.
-
If the rest of AZTEC is as active as AB is, I'm surprised you even noticed.
It's worth noting that Aurora Borealis had 14 nations declare a total of 27 wars on Polar within our first day of entering this war. For comparison's sake, RIA managed six nations and 11 wars. This is your third day at war with us and you've raised that to nine nations and 17 wars.
Let's not forget that AB's four largest nations literally could not hit NpO because they had no targets. Literally every member of RIA was in range of an AB nation, you faced no such limitations.
Let's also not forget that RIA has nearly 20 more members than Aurora Borealis' 40. That's a big difference. To be fair, your large numerical advantage is shrinking since a couple of your nations (Foxingland and Holy Russian Empire) have been deactivated because of (guess what) inactivity.
I'm not saying that Aurora Borealis is the most active alliance in the world, far from it. We're probably a little below-average. But what exactly does that make RIA?
-
No. You don't get to decide you dislike what DBDC did and therefore Aztec is at fault.
Particularly given that DBDC was rolling AZTEC's upper-tier in the first of the two wars mentioned.
-
You guys are doing a fantastic job having other people fight your war for you, I'd take it as a compliment rather than an insult.
I'm going with an AZTEC counter so you guys can make sure to punish RIA for actually following their treaties.
I would rather like to think that Aurora Borealis is [i]somewhat[/i] engaged in this war. At least, that's what the membership keeps telling me.
It seems a little silly to portray any possible counter on RIA as a punishment rather than a practical response. As you stated in this very thread, "RIA doesn't have the coverage to deal with AB in certain tiers, just a reality of our worlds mechanics." The same is true in reverse: AB doesn't have the coverage to deal with RIA in certain tiers.
Rhetoric aside, given that AZTEC and RIA have had extremely little contact for years, I doubt that your entry in this war was motivated by more than a simple desire to honor one's treaties and to help one's ally. You've indicated as such. In the event of a counter on RIA or Sparta by an ally of Aurora Borealis, why would the motivation be different on our end?
-
Beautiful.
The declaration, not this thread. This thread is horrible and another ridiculous retread of the "IRON during Disorder" debate.
Anyway, you really should've brought Fark and MHA along for the ride.
AB's not exactly bursting at the seems with targets. It's cool, we'll fill up when their friends hop over.
It's true that we have less than a fifth as many nations as RIA and Sparta. I do apologize for the paucity of targets, it's awfully rude of us. Nevertheless, allow me to offer a consolation prize:
Ace072199, Sparta has two nations in range of him. Or, how about Yelsew, you could put three guys on him! Wasso would really be a great choice, he's already fighting some big Polar nations, he could use a little more company. No, not your speed? Huh, well, there's always Jutopia, similar story there. None of them, then? Oh, hey, we just got a brand-new Piejonk in from Mexico. He's not built all that well to be honest with you, but golly, is he high-tech or what? Perhaps you're looking for an Evilest or a dexteoh? I'd be happy to get them out of the showcase and into war mode for you, just give me the word.
I must say, though, that your reluctance is disappointing. Your good friends at RIA did say that you got involved to do the following:
RIA doesn't have the coverage to deal with AB in certain tiers, just a reality of our worlds mechanics.
It must be that Mogar was specifically referring to our lower-tiers, since that's where nearly all of your declarations went. How strange.
Even a God King can bleed!
Ha, I told you all that [b]I[/b] was the God King all along. You're a fraud, Cuba!
-
Works for me. Come on, then, let's go.
-
God King not cabal. Cabal would imply a level of collective leadership and vision which is lacking on your side.
You're right. Everything in this coalition has pretty much been my idea. Ask around, you'll see that God King Sarkin rules the Lulzist forces with an iron fist.
-
Going in on an optional treaty with FTW when we were *right here*. I'll just show myself out.
Why waste an opportunity to invoke our shiny new FTW treaty?
-
Where's Nitro? :'(
Also, asleep. He'll join in the festivities in the morning.
-
Aurora Borealis declares war on the New Polar Order. We’re invoking the optional aggression clause of our treaty with the Fellowship of the Wolves.
Let’s have some fun.
Signed,
Drake Spoke, Triumvir
Jutopia, Triumvir
Sarkin, Triumvir
-
How are you going to criticize Polar for a plan that makes sense? I'm sorry the no-CB attack on Invicta hasn't yet yielded the results you're looking for - but to argue against this plan is a bit foolish. The plan to target us from the start was obvious. If we are the target, why not come get us? We got so much attention here - yet none of the battlefield as each alliance jockeys for "soft" targets.
Two points:
First, this war didn't start with a singular target. It's most accurate to say that the diverse set of alliances involved in this coalition would give very different answers on whom they consider to be their primary target. I'm sure that Polar is the target for some (rolling one of the Orders always is for some people), but for others, it may have been an Aftermath alliance. Kashmir's declaration indicated that they were dying to roll SUN in particular, for example. Global war coalitions are always fueled by a broad range of motivations.
Second, given the previous point, your plan doesn't actually make all that much sense. Grub has acknowledged (1) that your side of the web is going to lose this particular war. Dajobo has stated (2) that you don't actually mind losing a war here or there and (3) that you will indeed enter the war.
You've run the numbers, you know that this won't actually be all that one-sided when all is said and done, at least as far as global wars tend to go. Factor in that the enemy coalition has a huge amount of strength located in the upper-tier, much of which is out of reach of your nations, and the gap shrinks further. There's still a gap, of course, but it's hardly large enough to be a massacre like some wars. The only reason its possible for this coalition to dogpile on to AFM to anywhere near this extent is because XX has not deigned to help them. This can/will become a pretty decent fight once XX joins the fray, but up until that point it's going to remain a slaughter.
Polar has repeatedly congratulated itself on its savvy for "frustrating" our coalition. Is it mildly annoying that XX hasn't defended its allies in AFM? I guess, yeah. Once you've militarized, it's tedious to wait around. I'll grant that. Nevertheless, is mild annoying the enemy coalition by (1) hitting a couple of tech sellers and (2) pushing back their timeline really worth the trade-off of giving them the time and unimpeded freedom to slaughter your allies? That's a terrible trade-off.
So your plan is clearly to annoy us into attacking Polar in particular. This is why you're working so hard to present yourselves as the centerpiece of the war, rather than AFM, XX, or your sphere as a whole. If you're successful at goading a direct attack onto Polar, you can (hopefully) swing Valhalla and RIA to your side. That's all well and good, but the point stands that those two alliances still wouldn't be enough to flip the numbers on this war.
In other words, your plan is to run a propaganda campaign to invite a direct attack on NpO in order to add maybe two more alliances to your coalition, in exchange for giving the enemy coalition seemingly unlimited time to annihilate half of your sphere, including four direct allies. Even if this "NpO is the REAL target of your coalition!" thing wasn't propaganda and was indeed reality, don't you think the people who want to get after NpO will be happy to destroy your support base entirely unimpeded?
In short: you should come up with a better plan.
Prodigal Moon, on 22 Nov 2014 - 8:33 PM, said:
Hey man thanks for looking out for us and breaking it all down but I think we're just gonna end up sitting this one out. I hope AFM can forgive us later.
I'm sure that SNX, which has already lost 29.8% of its war mode NS in just ten days (largely before NG/NSO/INT got involved), is equally flippant. Or UPN, which has lost 28.3% of its war mode NS in about a week. If they are indeed this willing to get massacred to keep XX pristine, kudos to them for their unflinching loyalty and to you for your gleeful willingness to let them take the blows.
-
Yes, lets compare a couple hundred damage to a handful of nations to having half of your sphere burn. It is pretty obvious who is getting the better deal by not acting in the face of obvious provocation. I'll give you a hint,
it starts with Doom.
Whoa, hey man, this is totally off-base. Polar has landed a devastating 7,248 in NS damage on DT Probes. By comparison, their allies at Invicta, CCC, UPN and SNX have only lost a piddling 3,667,768 in NS. Combined with the damage to Polar and Sparta, that's just 4,747,641 NS total. That's basically nothing, right?
It's pretty obvious that Polar's ~tactical masterstroke~ is one for the ages. It couldn't possibly be a half-assed feint to provoke a a pre-emption of Polar that would get alliances like RIA and Valhalla engaged on their side. Nope, not a chance, that would be absurd. This "long-term plan" will most assuredly still be enforced months and years after this particular war is over.
-
What is actually accomplished by these silly semantic exercises? It's pretty obvious afm and xx are collaborating together and the current approach and its conditions of escalation are part of a wider plan developed through joint consensus (as with all coalitions that have ever existed ever). If you don't like what you see, you can always preempt accordingly.
Yeah, c'mon Dcrews, there's nothing like the ol' "Let them totally destroy half the coalition before getting involved" strategy. It's a classic.
-
And there's the anvil. Good luck!
-
Congratulations, friends!
-
There's the hammer.
-
A single war for two days. Well, a CB's a CB!
Given how things against Invicta started, I'm sure that DS has just been desperate for a good CB.
A Christmas Peace
in Alliance Announcements (IC)
Posted
Congrats, NPO!