bcortell

I urge you to not recruit him.

Here's some detailed stats about how much of each thing an AA has lost: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AsPHjM3AY7DgdFg1b0Fia2hMSzN6dmNQNHVHeXZqQWc&usp=drive_web#gid=2 It'll get updated periodically, probably not daily.

Bump. Yep, we're still here. And, mostly better than everyone (can't say that about Ginger).

Gopher provided me the stats for 1 Nov, so I updated the data accordingly. 63 nations were in PM on the first. On the 9th (today), 47 of the 63 remain in PM. Ten nations that were in WM are now in PM (didn't bother to look up if they all fought). 16 nations have left PM (and again, most have gone to war since leaving).

Correct. I just think it would be more accurate if I started it from the first instead of the fourth. Hit me up on IRC or PM me here if you have them.

Heh, I'm trying to get a hold of the 1 Nov statistics to do a weekly thing, but the earliest I picked up was on the 4th. (Probably doesn't make that much of a difference as those that would have gone to PM would still be in it). Anyways, here's a more detailed breakdown of TOP's nations and PM. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AsPHjM3AY7DgdGE1ZUlDN09wbkNHWUhNSFpmSy1weVE#gid=0 If you don't want to interpret from the data: From the 4th until today, 76% (52/68) of TOP's nations that were in PM have stayed in PM. Hence, 24% have come out of PM. Five nations that were in WM have gone to PM (all five fought a round of war prior to entering). Of the 16 nations that have left PM, all but one has declared an offensive war.

I click on the link in the OP and it says as of "Nov 7, 6:00 AM" Double checking now, it looks like that's just not getting updated (the date) but the data is.

Ogaden, did you change the link to the data?

Maybe with you. It's the OWF- anyone can comment on anything in here. We can still discuss it if we want. (Just pointing out how dumb your declaration of the discussions being done is.)

God damn it. It was supposed to say "Not this round, not next round." Like I said, you don't have the power to roll anyone. Not this round, not next round.

Let's be honest here. This talk is absolutely baseless. You have no power to roll anyone. Misfits has no power to roll anyone. Not this round, not next round. Just stop your silliness with this.

I actually meant my imaginary quote for Val, not you guys. Val, I could see offering something like that. You guys? Not so much. And, you are correct, it helps you guys a lot more than it does the other side.

"Everyone figured it out. We don't need to look worse, start launching nukes."

It probably isn't that difficult to get Val to agree to anything, really.

I believe you are mixing up different points here. If you're 70% is talking about last war, no one is disputing that. Berber said two out of the last three wars, which I think everyone assumed meant last war was the one left off. While you are correct about the them not being over 100K, it's a stretch to say that where they were wasn't in the upper tier at that point in the war. The tiers slide, especially as nearly everyone in the war was getting knocked down. Right now, sure they're mid to upper mid tier guys. Maybe activity was the problem. Of course, that doesn't really matter if it was or not, nor does it change the facts. That's just like any other AA saying, "Hey, we have a lot of useless NS, don't use it against us."

That's what was passed to OP members.

That's not a bad idea, but doesn't seem to fit the goal. I also wouldn't be surprised if admin had problems uploading an already known image like that. (Haven't asked him of course) I think we could build off of that, though. Thanks.

Hey guys, I need some community help. I'm able to upload a flag as one of the TE prizes from last round. So far, none of my suggestions have been allowed. I would really like to build off of the last one to make it into the game. Here is the submission that was denied: Admin's response to why it was denied: "You'll need to submit a flag that is in keeping with the current flag standards of the game (something that actually resembles a flag) and that is not copyrighted. If you cannot produce such a flag then you will forfeit your flag submission." Again, I'd like to keep its current theme. Maybe instead of the current wording, we can just put P.O.W. or something similar. Can you guys help me out to make it more like a flag so it meets the current flag standards of the game. Thanks.

tW should worry less about who hit them and more about not coordinating once on me (and I'm guessing a lot of other people) this war.

They're "elite."

I now see why tW don't like wars longer than three days.

25 of your top 37 nations were in PM by the end of the war. In your "lower" tier, only 23 of 61 nations were in PM.

Of course, it is their choice on who they attack out of the group of AA's that plotted against them. Do you not agree with that? Just because an AA has "wronged" them does not mean they have to attack them.

So that 30% is committed forces? I just want to make sure I understand you correctly. I mean, you said to look at the wars you were heavily engaged in, so I did (sure, the sample size I looked at was 1). I didn't ask about others, but thanks for informing me.

This is just from last war, but TOP started with 65 of 106 in PM. Within a week they had 53 in PM. By the end of the war they had 48 in PM. (I didn't do it by <100K because by the end of the war, nearly all of TOP was below that level.) What does this mean? Well, yes, some will come out of PM, but the smart money is on the majority of them staying in PM the entirety of war. TOP certainly PM'ed some guys as reserves, but they also PM'ed a ton of guys that didn't want to fight, weren't prepped to fight, and/or to limit the damage to those guys. Eh, last war you committed about 30% of those that started in PM. The rest stayed in PM for the entire war. So, I guess that depends on what you want to consider staying away from the battlefield or committing forces? Do you consider 30% committing your forces?