dealmaster13
-
Posts
329 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by dealmaster13
-
-
[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1307388661' post='2725537']
However, knowing that TPC is just hitting them in a down-declare to help their own flag runners is a bit disconcerting.
[/quote]
You are truly out of your mind, and after this final comment (without even considering what follows) my respect for you has gone straight down into the negative.
You should watch what you say on the OWF, because you are seriously damaging Pork Shrimp's PR in some peoples' eyes. I don't care if you are just joking around or not; at least make sure what you post is respectable and truthful. -
[quote name='Schad' timestamp='1307344929' post='2725247']
Heh, I'd hope that you're doing it to clear the way for a flag-runner
[/quote]
We don't play dirty. We play with honour.
Don't respect our ways of building, warring and enjoying ourselves?
Well I guess all you really need to do is have a flick through the record books to uncover the success of TPF and TPC by playing it [i]our[/i] way.
Have a good time, folks!
Plenty more to come - don't look forward to Round 18 just yet!
-
[quote name='Schad' timestamp='1307343382' post='2725234']
Squashing flag-runners is fine, just call it like it is
[/quote]
This
[quote name='Schad' timestamp='1307343382' post='2725234']
...not a war, just a way to leverage a serious strength imbalance to take out a competitor. The only issue I take here is casting it as some sort of fair war.
[/quote]
...and don't worry, there'll be a compromise.
Let the fire burn! [img]http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x82/dealmaster13/colbert.gif[/img]
Edit: Still can't spell 'compromise' and have no idea why -
In full, the 1 day reduction in nuclear anarchy has been implemented, however the message that is given at the top of a nation page has not been updated to support the new effects.
-
[quote name='Centaurus' timestamp='1306913759' post='2721903']
Liked the Commentary
[/quote]
Yeah, gotta second that; I lolled. -
[quote name='Einer' timestamp='1306824127' post='2721232']
Four paragraphs, and you managed to totally avoid mentioning how we tried to include DF in our declaration. Impressive.
[/quote]
Always good to fully understand the whole situation before commenting on it. -
Are you sure you have at least around 300 mil for a Moon base?
-
Land growth is not affected by the amount of land you have.
Read here for more information on the topic:
http://tournament.cybernations.net/about_topics.asp#Land -
[quote name='lazaraus45' timestamp='1306693755' post='2720135']
But i like my infra too much, i'd never take a nuke, especially not WRC powered ones.... oh wait
[/quote]
Aww... c'mon... a nuke powered by a WRC powered with 180 tech?
Show your true colours next time and get in on three offensive wars. -
[quote name='paul711' timestamp='1306508255' post='2719007']
Good luck in this little venture but I must say it doesn't seem to surprising to see Laz hugging infra and not fighting. Once again his true colors shine through.
[/quote]
Just had a flick through the history books and came across this which made me blush for a moment:
[quote]Double 0 Seven is definately in the top 3 players i respect in TE, not so much because of his nation building skills (I'd put mine against his) but because unlike most Flag Chasers he doesn't drop his AA to avoid a war, even after getting rolled once.[/quote]
So, Laz, if you're reading, do yourself some justice and set an example for yourself to follow for many more rounds to come
TPC dealing well with the the recent clash with Synergy - interesting to see what happens this update. -
[quote name='MrMuz' timestamp='1306676932' post='2719990']
If you kill more soldiers, you'll lose more soldiers who were attacking them. Unless one side had many more tanks than the other.
[/quote]
If you've triggered or received any battle reports in CN, I think you'll find out that what you lose compared to your opponent in a ground battle - even ignoring nuclear attacks from the equation - varies not only by the randomness of the ground attack game mechanics, but whether you win or lose that ground battle.
So your idea that your 'soldiers killed' count would roughly match that of your "attacking casualties" is completely flawed on the basis that you're assuming most of us only win 50% of the time, which is why you may think this suggestion to be pointless.
There is also a Suggestions Box sub-forum for ideas like these. -
Congratulations to Synergy for stepping up to the challenge.
-
[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1306619288' post='2719681']
I guess you don't realize what I'm saying. GR has placed him in TPC so when you guys war GR, of course they're not going to hit him like they would otherwise. He can make it look like he's fighting as much as he wants, it's the guys he is fighting that aren't going to damage him.
[/quote]
Yeah, and do you realise how damaging that is for a nation when it is so clearly publicised?
As said previously, the appropriate actions will take place post-war as currently we have our hands full both in-game and irl. Please be patient. -
[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1306580030' post='2719465']
Exactly... I guess TPC doesn't realize he's a member because it protected him from attacks. Now that TPC has hit GR, it couldn't be better for him.
I guess I've never seen an AA get used like this and be so clueless towards it. That is, if they're not working together...
[/quote]
He's actually recently been taking on all of my nation shaping suggestions from me (which by the way doesn't compliment his growth, but rather prepares him for a war such as this one).
Questions will be raised when the time is right; currently we're focused on the alliance war we have at hand, and this nation in question is involved in it.
What I'm more concerned about is the lack of nukes flying from GR's end - I was admittedly anticipating it to be heavily raining uranium on TPC soil as it was in our previous war with GR, however that doesn't seem to be the case right now.
Still more to come... -
[quote name='Confusion' timestamp='1306545911' post='2719246']
Well, what if no one joins, Does this turn into GR's fault? There aren't many AAs who can 'even' this out, mind you. Why don't you just attack another AA?
[/quote]
The main problem with that is that a large number of us have decided to attack two or three nations which leaves us with little offensive potential. So the ideal situation is that someone else cuts in by their own accord such that they can fill our defensive slots without simply having a go at us by preying on the weak or inactive.
We'll see what happens - and if nothing does happen, we'll be happy to take the appropriate actions. -
[quote name='Vespassianus' timestamp='1306497229' post='2718947']
Oh guys why didn't you hit this RD noob: http://tournament.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=1000315 ?
He's the biggest infra hugger for rounds and now he even has an ADP...
[/quote]
Apparently he solo-flag runs for his SE alliance.
Wouldn't want to ruin his chances, now. -
[quote name='paul711' timestamp='1306293269' post='2717879']
I can respect your not wanting TPC brought up in mine and Laz's argument but he is issuing challenges and calling OP cowards while flying the TPC tag.
[/quote]
We'll deal with that. OP has my utmost respect. -
Good catch. Strange how no one had mentioned it earlier.
-
[quote name='Samus' timestamp='1305409515' post='2711858']
Just like to say thank you to the dude that decided he could [i]defend[/i] TPC without a valid declaration. You will eat my nukes for the next 7 days.
[/quote]
Hahaha, if only you knew who that 'dude' is. -
[quote name='Guppy Fish' timestamp='1305414396' post='2711886']
TPC and GR together hold all but one slot in the race, that being mine in attacking. Nice!
[/quote]
Very interesting stat - thanks for noticing. -
[quote name='StevieG' timestamp='1304384105' post='2704510']
So in 3 defensive wars, If I GA all of them twice, and they GA me all twice, it is possible to lose 12 GAS per day, and drop millions in a single round of wars?
[/quote]
Of course, I'm sure you know how it all works. A quick calculation says that if you start with 2.17 mil and lose 5% to 12 GAs, you lose almost exactly 1 mil. Why you would GA them all twice with less than 50% odds, I have no idea. -
[quote name='StevieG' timestamp='1304338620' post='2704077']
How is the loot left behind from an unsuccessful GA worked out?
[/quote]
Well, you can loot anything from 0% and 5%, and you can even loot over 5% by looting the 100k limit. -
[quote name='StevieG' timestamp='1304313129' post='2703876']
With 3 wars, and 2 GAs each way, thats a potential 12 GAs I could lose per day. Think of that amount of loot
.
[/quote]
That's why there's a 5% cap; you're never going to be sucked dry from GAs alone. Also, you wouldn't take on three aggressive wars anyway if the tactic is damage limitation.
Some stats:
It takes 32 fully successful GAs to drop from 5 mil to 1 mil.
It takes 45 fully successful GAs to drop from 1 mil to 100k.
It takes 14 fully successful GAs to halve your warchest. -
[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1304279745' post='2703312']
Yep, I believe it is. With the new rules, it's much easier to get nukes early, and so those people are free to use them. (Of course, unless the AA's decided not to.)
[/quote]
Yep, you've got to be pretty dedicated to invest in nukes with an HNMS or spies so early on... and what do you know? LE's most popular wonder at the moment is the HNMS.
TPC DoW
in TE OWF Archive
Posted
[quote name='Schad' timestamp='1307392878' post='2725576']
I haven't...if I'd woken up to see TPC had hit another AA to balance things out, I'd be cheering for them.
[/quote]
[quote name='bcortell' timestamp='1307393286' post='2725580']
Heh. Empty threat is empty. And, are you saying you aren't working with Laz to get the flag? How about letting the GR runner use your AA to help himself?
For those I care about, I doubt that I'm ruining PS' reputation. Just because you don't like what I'm saying doesn't mean it isn't true. I'd be pretty ashamed with the wars we have done if I was TPC's leadership this round- down-declare vs OP, two poor wars against GR, and a down-declare against Roh.. I guess we're both glad I'm not.
Ah, got it on the first part. What do you mean 'you guys'? I'm bcortell and only bcortell. And, if you read my post, I already state that I'm not against hitting flag runners. Maybe what I said was diluted by my comments about TPC. Oh well.
[/quote]
[quote name='paul711' timestamp='1307393728' post='2725586']
I agree with both Shad's and Bcortell's assesment of this war and TPC's actions this round. I mean Laz and BG are high tier in TPC yet they are not fighting. If it walks like a duck and if it quacks like a duck then logic dictates that it must be a duck.
[/quote]
All three quotes point out one common theme.
Look at the 5 TPC nations that have attacked during this war.
Do you see something in common? Is there something strange about it? Something familiar?
I am absolutely astonished by how you consider this to be an updeclare when:
[list][*]5 TPC nations are currently offensively attacking 6 Rohirrim nations
[*]TPC is currently attacking with 84,755.83 NS against Rohirrim defending with 121,865.94 NS
[*]TPC currently have a nuclear disadvantage[/list]
I understand that you may not have taken the time out of your clealy busy schedules to look at the war screens in-game, however from the stats that I have listed above, I have [i]no[/i] clue as to how our current war at this point in time is some 'irrespectable down-declare'.
When the time is right we [i]will[/i] bring others in to allow our other nations to participate in an end of round war. Now is not the right time for that and for some reason, a few of you fail to see that.
TPC are experienced and honorable enough to make it's own respectable decisions, I'm sure you know that by now, and if you don't - then you are clearly not on Planet Steve.