Hyperion321
-
Posts
3,015 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Hyperion321
-
-
Neutrals have been killed over their alliance rank before. Wouldn't be surprised if it ever happens again.
-
[quote name='Omniscient1' timestamp='1307654543' post='2728117']
GOD hates about 90% of the people in this game, so don't flatter yourself.
[/quote]
Hell, they even hate us these days... -
[quote name='Mathias' timestamp='1307508609' post='2726684']
I'm not one to be nice, but are you out of your !@#$@#$ mind? Those terms are completely ridiculous and for $18 million?
Where was Polaris while UINE was letting R&R screw them over? I know UINE is a terrible alliance but seriously they don't deserve this over chump change.
[/quote]
At least they didn't keep them at war for a couple months just to destroy their one upper tier nation. -
Nothing like a good ole' victory to cap off a wonderful day. Congrats boys.
-
Spartan Insanity. I dig it.
-
[quote name='Charles Stuart' timestamp='1307422974' post='2725927']
I thought as much
[/quote]
Is it sad that we've fought so much that neither one of bothers to care anymore. -
[quote name='Charles Stuart' timestamp='1307411706' post='2725840']
Pretty piss poor logic because by your reasoning then we shouldn't get the blame for any of these wars either but rather these alliances who won our wars for us should be the ones labelled as evil. That means your alliance too I might add but of course, you will find some way to disagree so the point is void
[/quote]
Rabble rabble rabble boo hiss boo. -
[quote name='Jacapo Saladin' timestamp='1307408460' post='2725811']
That's fine if you don't want to uphold commitments you owe to your allies. Alliance priority #1 should be how to take care of your allies, not how to weasel out of commitment.
[/quote]
You're right. Maybe next war we'll go hit a bloc or something instead of being giant pansies. -
[quote name='Jacapo Saladin' timestamp='1307406233' post='2725791']
Really? Congratulations, you lumped onto NPO and rode their victories to relevance then jumped off when they faded. What have you accomplished since then to prove how great of an alliance you are, since you claim to have won so many glorious victories. I find it funny that you worked so hard to distance yourself from NPO once you figured out they weren't the alliance to ride on anymore.
Your alliance Foreign Relations consists of getting your teeth beaten into your skull then sucking up to them to beg for a new treaty. Such great leadership Chef, I can see why Valhalla is on a path of ruling the world.
Your simple rebuttals and retorts go a long way to displaying the diminished mental capacity you posses.
[/quote]
Actually NPO never got their own victories (or very rarely did). Alliances like Valhalla, TPF, IRON, FOK, MCXA, and MHA generally won all of their wars for them. I haven't always agreed with or liked Valhalla, but I still none the less respect their history and capabilities. I suggest you adopt the same mentality if you wish to be successful in this game. -
[quote name='Jacapo Saladin' timestamp='1307394984' post='2725613']
Is that the only measure of a good alliance in your eyes? No wonder you sat out last war. Gotta preserve the infra. By the way, which one of us here has been at one time associated with the Coalition of Cowards. Was that Hydra, or was that Valhalla? I forget, please enlighten me.
[/quote]
I'm pretty sure Valhalla still fought in Karma, and I'm pretty sure Hydra didn't even exist.
-
[quote name='KagetheSecond' timestamp='1307382213' post='2725488']
Pillowfort gets their own breakdown.
[/quote]
This. PF is definitely strong enough to be considered influential. -
[quote name='Denial' timestamp='1307367650' post='2725354']
Superior upper tier, tech levels, and Wonders, even after a protracted war. I'll take that.
[/quote]
We're not [i]that[/i] far behind tbh. Also, the average NS is skewed so hard from both Umb and GOONS. It's hilarious
-
[quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1307329671' post='2724917']
[color="#0000FF"]Stay strong my friends, and remember that I am behind you. Always.[/color]
[/quote]
From what I can see R&R is handling them from behind pretty well too. -
I took a day to do some stat comparisons for 5 of the most notable power centers on the treaty web. I'll be updating it as regularly as possible, but considering it took me almost all day to do 5 blocs, it might only be a once a month kind of thing. I will also be adding a few extra blocs whenever I get time tomorrow, most notably AZTEC, Synergy, as well as the more well known defacto and unofficial power centers, such as the NoR-Viking power cluster and pillowfort (official or not, they are still power centers in my opinion). So, anyway, here is the first edition of the Power Center Comparison sheet for June 2011.
[IMG]http://i55.tinypic.com/2pow2te.jpg[/IMG] -
[quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1307328272' post='2724857']
It would be a close fight with both sides taking huge amounts of damage and being able to fight for a long time if they wanted to. Since neither side would agree to a long drawn out war without trying to bring as much NS on their side as possible from other allies, its a pretty pointless scenario to think about. Alliances with higher avg NS than most don't get that way from willingness to fight what looks like a very even war to be a good sport.
[/quote]
You haven't met TOP have you -
[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1307314892' post='2724590']
Saved for later.
[/quote]
He was talking about how people who aren't in the fight would be considered stronger by comparison in the aftermath to the post-war-ravaged nations that actually did fight, not that people who were cowards would stay out (kind of like how NPO definitely had a a lot to gain from cluster$%&@ considering everyone who could have taken them down was mutually destroyed in the war). I honestly don't see how his statement could have been misconstrued unless on purpose...it was quite obvious what he meant. -
I considered roguing on GGA back when I was like 70k (In the days when that was really big). I had a WRC (they didn't), a bil and a half warchest (they didn't), an MP, and uranium. If Karma didn't happen when it did, I probably would have kept nuking GGA recruits for all eternity.
-
One of the best protectorates we've ever had. I'll miss that AA
-
[quote name='Stonewall Jaxon' timestamp='1307291253' post='2724393']
Ivanelterrible. After that he joined FAN for a while, and eventually went rogue on TOP. Unfortunately the concept of roguing and coming out ahead is completely obsolete in this age. Nukes will wear you down to dust no matter how well you fight
[/quote]
Ya, nukes just aren't as proportionally damaging anymore considering average nation size and war chests have grown considerably. Back then it was more economically feasible to let Ivan win than to try to take on a nuke rogue, which were one of the scariest things in the game back then, and often got you EZI'd. -
It doesn't matter how well they follow the guide, it still won't top roguing GATO by yourself...and winning. That just simply can't be beat.
-
[quote name='KagetheSecond' timestamp='1307260700' post='2724287']
I think the Asgaard side vs Pillowfort would be a closer fight. In theory.
OMFG - 23 - 1,843,306
Gremlins - 40 - 2,843,970
TOP - 136 - 7,847,549
Argent - 57 - 3,195,981
Total - 256 - 15,721,806
Avg 61,413
EDIT: Added Gre to even out the sides.
[/quote]
Oooooh that also would be a good one.
I think modern DH at the peak of their power vs 1V at the peak of their power would be great as well. Even if 1V had numbers superiority, modern stat inflation from Umbrella and MK would definitely make up for that. It would be like GW1 except in reverse. Even if in all likeliness Umb/MK would just slaughter endless waves of people with modern tech ratios, it would still be fun as hell to watch 20 mil strength take on 50-60 mil. -
[quote name='goldielax25' timestamp='1307259250' post='2724282']
Yes, but it took an entire coalition to throw their big nations down to take TOP down, whereas outside of a handful of NoR/Val people, they couldn't touch Umb.
[/quote]
Well, we didn't [i]really[/i] throw the entire coalition at TOP specifically. All we did really was just enlist any and all alliances we could find that had a top tier nation or two, and just used those top tier nations and nothing else. The rest of the memberships of those alliances didn't really do anything beyond loan us their top tier dudes here and there (and maybe mid tier for staggers, but not as much considering TOP's mid tier wasn't numerous). C&G/Sparta/MHA/Fark did most of the heavy lifting on TOP and IRON, and since our top tier was engaged Umbrella and Asgaard handled the bigger guys from TOOL/Legion/OMFG for us. That was back when Umb/PC just went front to front shutting everyone down for a few weeks. For a time there was a race to see how many fronts they could close in one war.
Ahhhhh good times.
edit: After reading your post again...ya, you're right. It took an entire coalition throwing their big nations down -
And what a wild 5 years it was. Congrats fellas (and ladies).
-
[quote name='Zoomzoomzoom' timestamp='1307216089' post='2723847']
Not to rip on Asgaard, but have they actually ever fought a war? I know Val, DT, and NoR are more than competent because everyone has seen them engage in various wars.
[/quote]
They have. They kicked the crap out of a lot of people in cluster$%&@. I'm sure Legion remembers them well.
[quote name='HHAYD' timestamp='1307222494' post='2723903']
Just a question, how long can Umbrella maintain more than 15 or 20 members if all of their brand-new low NS recruits are constantly triple-teamed?
[/quote]
Umbrella doesn't recruit low NS people. Hell, they don't recruit anyone.
Official Synergy Announcement
in Alliance Announcements (IC)
Posted
You had a good run. Sorry it didn't work out.