saxasm
-
Posts
470 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by saxasm
-
-
hahahahahahahahahah. i knew you would fold. how embarrassing.
We'd have let them surrender either way, you know. Beating on a micro for no good reason is just pointless. I do get why you'd want us to fight needless wars, though. -
Does Monsters Inc. even want to peace out? I haven't seen them state as much.
-
Mogar, quit hogging the viceroyships. You old ones need to retire to let a new, younger generation of viceroys start their careers.
-
Don't think Pacifica is safe in this, Saxy.
I know. We, too, have in the past wounded Polar most grievously. None of us are innocent in the persecution of the noble, suffering servants of CN -- the Polars. We must all carry this guilt together. -
Poor Polar, being so picked on. Everyone has abandoned poor widdle Polar, even your old friends are hurting you. Do you need someone to blow on the ouchie to make it feel better?
-
I've just added individual nation stats to this collection, so you can now see how you are doing individually in this war.
https://cybernations.lyricalz.com/warstats/MI6-Oculus
Some people's stats may be slightly off, although not anymore than 12 hours.
If I look in-game, it has BrJLa still being in Pacifica. What's up with that? -
For coalition names, I'd suggest Oculus versus MI3.5 (Since both MI and MI6 are on the same side, it only makes sense to take the average of the two of them).
-
The late DOW was to prevent tech supplies from entering PM.
Hey, at least you have an inflated sense of your own strength. -
Since you already set a theme so nicely
-
While this may be true, it has been a long time since we seen 7+ alliances against a single alliance. Not since the last time NPO led a bloc actually.
Uhm. By my count, almost every war has had at least one alliance fight more than seven other alliances. You probably want to rephrase that post a bit. -
Pacifica lost its great talent long ago, a Pacifica merely happy to survive is no Pacifica.
Ah, yes, even more deep and insightful analysis by Mogar into the political realities of today: Pacifica is merely surviving, nothing more.
-
Seriously is this the best CN has to offer anymore?
Yep, it's an infinite volume of Myth/Mogar threads until the end of time. Miserable, isn't it?
-
5% active? That's so bad it's almost impressive.
-
You really should have seen it coming.
-
At the current rates, they will catch up to us in 45 days, at which point we will both be at 70 score.
This is not a future I like.
-
Depends on whether you by "dividing in half" mean "dividing into two equally-sized pieces" or "dividing into two symmetric pieces". The former could be done in a way not resulting in two right triangles.
-
Triangles are the best angles.
o/ Oculus
-
He's clearly going for the most-simultaneously-annoyed-AAs award. Making a good effort towards it, at least.
-
Don't you think having your name put on a "raid for science" list might in itself cause lower retention?
-
Friendly tip: If you wish to be a credible anything, don't associate with aNiMaLz.
(I want you to attract some non-super-tiny nations to your crusade against us. The lower tier gets all the fun, and I get none...) -
I personally don't have issue with raiding, although we aren't a raiding alliance. The Chow raids as described above I see more as organized rougery. They are two different aspects of raiding, with the latter being less desirable. If data existed, I would expect it to show that normal raids have minimal impact on game decline, and chow raids, while still small would have slightly more impact than normal raids.
Data does exist, you know.
-
Being a dove isn't a habit, silly man. I'm just making sure I'm as prepared as those who may wish me harm.
I, for one, greatly look forward to seeing Rey's nation prepared to take on the Pacific. It will be a sight to behold.
-
Perhaps we should do less anecdotes and more data? It should be possible to check the deletion rate for raided new nations versus the deletion rate for non-raideds, and similarly the deletion rates for (small) raiders and for small non-raiders. That should at least give a hunch of how it works, and is a much more minor undertaking than a worldwide raiding ban.
-
AAs need to quit playing this game so conservatively. AAs that go out of their way to have treaties on both sides so they pick the winning side. AAs that rather sign 3 more treaties than drop 1. How many alliances have someone to attack outside of 2 treaty chains these days? In other words, nut the $%&@ !@#$%*es and lets do this !@#$.
Bye GOONSActually, according to my (reasonably accurate) data on currently held MD treaties, the median shortest paths between two AAs on the treaty web is in fact 4 treaties long. The mean is 3.74, with a standard deviation of 1.6.
Oculus Third Decree
in Alliance Announcements (IC)
Posted
Sure there are reasons to keep someone you were attacked by at war, such as to demonstrate that it is costly to do so, and to dissuade future hit-and-run type attacks. Another might be to demonstrate the ability to keep the war going, or some interest in hurting the opponent more. These are perfectly good reasons for e.g. MI6 to continue fighting us.
I think you'll agree that none of those reasons really apply to us peacing MI. I don't think anyone was ever in doubt about how this war would transpire.