Dagrr
-
Posts
640 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Blog Comments posted by Dagrr
-
-
GOONS because the are being swarmed with other alliances, Umbrella because they are hardly fighting, and Legion because this is for NPO specifically. You don't have to agree with it, but they were justified.
And Legion is actually added on there later, when they started fighting MK around mid March.
-
Wait, what? This is supposed to stop the 'revisionism' and yet you didn't track GOONS, Umbrella, Legion or any of the other alliances on that front?
I haven't really been paying much attention, so I don't really know what revisionism you're talking about, but on the face of it this doesn't exactly look like a way to prove, well, anything.
Please stop trying to start an argument because of my AA. I explained exactly why I organized things this way. The graph is centered on alliances engaged with NPO most directly. The revisionism and !@#$%*ing I'm referring to is over topics not relating to these stats. If I tracked GOONS, I would have to track all the alliances heavily engaged with them. If I added Umbrella, I would have to add Molon Labe. If I added NADC, I would have to add FOK and VE, etc. It's not designed to "prove" anything. It just means less work for me. If you want to track all of them, feel free.
If I wanted to engage in real revisionism, I would have just put GOONS and Umbrella on there and left the alliances attacking them off.
-
Also, I would look at % of NS in upper tier (and PM, by extension) rather than % of members.
71K out of 1.4 million is about .5% of their NS
3.5 million out of 6.6 million of NPO's top tier is still existing and in pm. This would be over 50% of their NS. Big difference
Are you just being initially obtuse now? The war started with us over 16 million. That means it accounts for roughly 22% of our prewar strength. People lose NS during wars. The war is still going because 78% of our alliance's NS at war, with a large proportion of that being destroyed, isn't enough.
-
I like it.
Alliance leaders are charged with the promotion of their own alliance's power, culture and ideals. They are not responsible for saving the game.
I don't think he was saying that. He is saying alliance leaders are responsible for preserving the community. Given that online communities are player driven, I don't have a problem with that.
-
Oh there were reasons. It just that the reasons defined in Archon's DoW were mainly about being butthurt for years, plus something about STA and NpO wanting to keep us out of the war altogether. People just aren't satisfied with that being the official "CB". The whole preemptive strike thesis put forward by Roq was made after the fact. The real reason we're still at war is because Doom House wants a near monopoly on top tier nations. In effect, DH wants to go ahead and put themselves in an advantageous position for the next war. The NpO-VE war this was allegedly connected to is over but someone forgot to tell the talking heads on the forum. There probably won't be another large war for a year or more with this strategy, but hey, they're playing for the longterm.
Feel free to prove me wrong.
-
Yes, I've been a life long proponent of keeping FAN at war and have claimed that was good for the game. After all I was a member of Legion in 2007 so it goes without saying. You, of course, defended FAN at the time. Lets just do it all over again, for old times sake.
I get it. Carry on.
-
Its just absolutely insane that anyone thinks that keeping 800 odd active players in CN at war because of some faux "you aren't damaged enough yet" argument is good for the game. Maybe its good for DoomHouse in the short term because they would destroy our upper tier, but everyone needs an adversary. Their prewar objective was met of denying our intervention on the NpO front, if that was ever a legitimate CB. Everything else is either butthurt or just trying to maximize their uppertier advantage for the next war. Which won't be for a year or more if our uppertier is destroyed. 100k nations don't grow on trees. The nation building and the political element are linked.
Whatever, I'm done here. Yes, I mad.
-
People hiding all of their strength and letting their small nations duke it out isn't helping the game either. Based on your last 2 wars, who really cares if NPO takes part, as they just hide their top tier in peace mode.
That's why the terms were set the way they were in karma, that's why you aren't getting off this war without taking some more hits with your dove nations.
And look at the results. One major war since Karma. The heaviest reps in the games history. We put them there so we can actually fight at some point in the future. Apparently your side just doesn't want to see that fight at anything resembling even odds.
It's no where close to all of our NS being in peacemode. We lost 5 million NS in the first 10 days.
Why do people like you still wonder why wars don't happen more often? Half of our NS destroyed in a successful "preemptive" strike for a war that is now over seems to be more than enough.
-
I think it's been stated many many times that the war continues because mass use of PM to avoid fighting isn't a precendent Doomhouse wants to become prevelant.
You are being disingenous to imply you have no idea what their reasons are.
Ahem-"What's next? For the good of the game, NPO must lose 75% of it's NS so we can't have another war for a year? "
Its for the good of the game folks.
-
Take a look at NpO and STA.
MK's "tactical victory" is ironic and a take on NPO's revisionism.
The terms can change and have been negotiable since they were given. A counteroffer has not been presented aside from white peace, which was rejected.
NpO is a separate war. If it was one and the same, this war would be over for reasons already mentioned.
I find hilarious that we're still running with "Hopeless Coalition hasn't fought" when almost everyone on the NPO sector has suffered roughly 50% causalities. Save Umbrella of course. What's next? For the good of the game, NPO must lose 75% of it's NS so we can't have another war for a year?
-
NPO compared to other alliances has been damaged substantially less and the fact that they have been able to keep much of their NS in pm for the entirety of the war makes it hard to say that they've been definitively defeated.
The revisionism is definitely a concern, especially with people on your side saying they will win by making DH bored and getting white peace, so it wouldn't have been strong before the extension. The line existed before.
The original terms can be negotiated but white peace is highly unlikely.
Which alliances were hurt more?
NPO's NS before the war was over 16 million. It is now under 8 million.
MK's NS before the war was 11 million. It is now 6.5 million.
Source: http://uevil.maybe.net/new/2011-01-24_R.png
Plenty of NPO's uppertier were hit. They weren't all in peacemode.
As far as the revisionism go, you're going to get that anyway. Hell the MK wiki calls the Unjust War a tactical victory. And I will be flabbergasted if the terms change on your end, barring this going on for a few more months.
Preemption is moot, the war you "preempted" us for is over.
-
"Defeat NPO" is what it comes down to. In addition, to what you've said, I've never seen another DH government say anything to the contrary of what I've said. It's mostly been members saying stuff that contradicts it for reasons I can't fathom.
"Defeat NPO" is really...general. If you keep up with the preemption argument, we've already been defeated. The NS losses say DH "won", albeit MK and GOONS lost a lot too. Foreign policy wise, you still have all the cards. Given those limited objectives, the war should be over.
Instead, you've opted for completely destroying our ability to make war in the upper tier for months and crippling our rebuilding procedures. Then you turn around, claim those terms are light and announce it on the OWF, resulting in a 150 page topic. I'm not sure if you just wanted to avoid the standard NPO historical revisionism that would have come with giving us white peace. Given the objectives you could have cited, before this war was extended past the NpO front's end, you're argument that you had won would have been strong. But no, you decided to press so now there's no way you could back down from the original terms offered without being seen as "losing", at least in a PR sense. The end result is this war which is probably going to last for months and kill off lots of bored players, primarily on our side, but I expect it will have a toll on yours as well. That is my problem with DH's stance.
-
So while, the preemption part was an objective, it's not necessarily the only one, because the issue of the PM stuff came up.
Then please, tell us all what the rest of Doom House's objectives in this war are. You would know.
-
You know, it's almost as if Doom House isn't comprised of several multifaceted organizations with hundreds of individual members run by a couple dozen of those individual members who all might happen to have their own opinions on the objectives and motives of this war. You know, instead of the hive-mind that we all know it certainly is.
Oh pardon me. Here I was thinking that the purpose of alliances and blocs was to put forth a coherent messages.
I understand that individual members have different views, but DH's own myriad governments can't seem to get their story straight. Roq was running around like a chicken with its head cut off for weeks trying to prove that it was a preemptive attack and that alone was sufficient justification. Now we're getting the whole "NPO provoked this months beforehand" and "NPO wouldn't been in this position if their FA didn't suck" treatment.
-
People literally cannot want two things at the same time.
Yeah I've noticed the DH doublethink as well. They can't seem to agree on what the objective of all this is.* Roq seemed to believe pretty strongly in the preemption thing.
*Other than the ~terms~ of course.
-
This is the part where Roq shows up and talks about how this was a preemptive attack to ensure NPO did not intervene in the VE-Polaris dispute.
But given that goal has already been achieved, we of course have to move on to what DoomHouse's real objective is.
-
Wow Kansas didn't just lose...they got !@#$@#$ bent over. Hail our VCU overlords!
-
Deal with it?
-
Cool. We could do a NO U circle now, but eh, we've already said everything worth saying here.
-
The luxury of being on your side is that you'll never have to worry about being being curbstomped. Doing all the "tactical" stuff you want won't have any long term consequences. We pull our big nations out, we expend our assets on a war that's already been decided, with absolutely no guarantee that we won't be hit again as soon as we become a "threat." This war isn't worth sacrificing strategic resources on. They aren't coming out. You should "deal with it."
Whoever is in power will complain about peacemode. This has all happened before and will happen again.
-
If you declare on someone based on the possibility of their being a threat to the future, why would you let them rebuild to a position where they would become a threat?
Inb4 a bunch of "reallys" and "in all probabilities." If you think that wasn't part of why DH declared, read Archon's DoW again.
-
'Peace mode doesn't kill or stagnate the game.'
*refers to the use of peace mode in the most stagnant and awful war of the last two years*
That statement would have been a lot bolder if this wasn't only the second major war since Karma.
-
Because giving Umbrella blue balls is hilarious.
-
I got you losing in the sweet 16 to Judge X.
Here's my bracket: http://www.bracketmaker.com/predict.cfm?parent=736658
NPO Front NS Stats
in Henry's Blog
A blog by Dagrr in General
Posted
Yeah, the type of google doc graph I was using didn't allow me to label the axis. I changed it to a new one, but I still kinda of prefer the old.
The ten of thousands thing is a little awkward, but google docs wasn't letting me set a minimum value for the y axis. Doing it by the actual raw NS wouldn't fit on one screen correctly. But millions of NS...cmon. Maybe thousands. Ten of thousands is a nice compromise I think.