Jump to content

End of the Round Top 5 Nations


SoADarthCyfe6
 Share

Recommended Posts

Found after a bit of digging however, here are your top 6 nations.

A Congratulations to Rudolfina of G-6 to winning the round!

[img]http://i51.tinypic.com/11tc1mu.jpg[/img]

Edit: Top 6*

Edited by SoADarthCyfe6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

interesting, I thought synergy had it in the bag. With that said, big congrats to you Rudolfina. :) helluva lot of tech for TE lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='dealmaster13' timestamp='1303298145' post='2694518']
Interesting to see them all black, no?
[/quote]

Kind of like it was all Blue last round. :smug:

http://www.cybernations.net/tournament_winners.asp?Round=15

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is actually interesting that given all the game changes this round, the winner had a NS of 37,076.122 while the prior round winner was at 32,000.000. That is only a 16% difference.

Conversely, #100 in Round 16 was at 9,258.506 NS and #100 in Round 15 was at 3,565.908 NS. Almost a 3 to 1 difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1303320995' post='2694723']
It is actually interesting that given all the game changes this round, the winner had a NS of 37,076.122 while the prior round winner was at 32,000.000. That is only a 16% difference.

Conversely, #100 in Round 16 was at 9,258.506 NS and #100 in Round 15 was at 3,565.908 NS. Almost a 3 to 1 difference.
[/quote]

Yeah, I noticed that a few days back, however I then realized that OP last round had 2 major wars, first one being a complete curbstomp of G-6 and the second one taking out smaller competition. You guys pretty much ended with perfect nation growing environment unlike this round which there were a ton of wars and A LOT of rogues. This rounds G-6 environment compared to last rounds OP's environment was not good at all for nation growing, to many aggressive wars :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually don't like the changes. I don't think this is a full representation of how the new system works, given that G-6 was involved in curbstomping all potential challengers and had round dominance since day 30 of the round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='SoADarthCyfe6' timestamp='1303324561' post='2694755']
Yeah, I noticed that a few days back, however I then realized that OP last round had 2 major wars, first one being a complete curbstomp of G-6 and the second one taking out smaller competition. You guys pretty much ended with perfect nation growing environment unlike this round which there were a ton of wars and A LOT of rogues. This rounds G-6 environment compared to last rounds OP's environment was not good at all for nation growing, to many aggressive wars :P
[/quote]

I don't know about that.

I would like to know the casuality stats for this rounds winner.

I came in second last round and here were my casuality stats:

Number of Soldiers Lost in All Wars. 27,751 Attacking + 50,163 Defending = 77,914 Casualties
Casualty Rank: Ranked #38 of 1,199 Nations (3.17%)


And I know that the OP winner had more casualties than I did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1303325066' post='2694762']
I don't know about that.

I would like to know the casuality stats for this rounds winner.

I came in second last round and here were my casuality stats:

Number of Soldiers Lost in All Wars. 27,751 Attacking + 50,163 Defending = 77,914 Casualties
Casualty Rank: Ranked #38 of 1,199 Nations (3.17%)


And I know that the OP winner had more casualties than I did.
[/quote]

You guys also have a way more experienced and active group and raided on a consistant bases towards the beginning and middle of the round. Towards the end you were all Upper Tier nations that a few GA's and Nukes could easily boost your casulities through the roof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1303320995' post='2694723']
It is actually interesting that given all the game changes this round, the winner had a NS of 37,076.122 while the prior round winner was at 32,000.000. That is only a 16% difference.

Conversely, #100 in Round 16 was at 9,258.506 NS and #100 in Round 15 was at 3,565.908 NS. Almost a 3 to 1 difference.
[/quote]

But look at the #40 NS for rounds 4-12, something unnatural occured in rounds 13-15 and I was even in round 13 and somehow ended up with 1k infra in second place, but I can't remember what happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='dealmaster13' timestamp='1303325467' post='2694771']
But look at the #40 NS for rounds 4-12, something [b]unnatural[/b] occured in rounds 13-15 and I was even in round 13 and somehow ended up with 1k infra in second place, but I can't remember what happened.
[/quote]

Politics, it is something completely unnatural that consumes us all.

Edited by SoADarthCyfe6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1303325066' post='2694762']
I don't know about that.

I would like to know the casuality stats for this rounds winner.

I came in second last round and here were my casuality stats:

Number of Soldiers Lost in All Wars. 27,751 Attacking + 50,163 Defending = 77,914 Casualties
Casualty Rank: Ranked #38 of 1,199 Nations (3.17%)


And I know that the OP winner had more casualties than I did.
[/quote]

Don't compare last round to this one- They don't even come remotely close, at all. You just can't compare our flag win to OPs. There are way more variables involved.



Confusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Instr' timestamp='1303324733' post='2694757']
I actually don't like the changes. I don't think this is a full representation of how the new system works, given that G-6 was involved in curbstomping all potential challengers and had round dominance since day 30 of the round.
[/quote]

Someone sounds butthurt, if I may say so myself.



Confusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Onified' timestamp='1303326467' post='2694782']
#7 was Koala of Arboreal Marsupial, member of the Fightin Division!!! (and I would have uploaded my sig as the flag if I had won)

That was me by the way :)
[/quote]

Shame

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Confusion' timestamp='1303330351' post='2694822']
Don't compare last round to this one- They don't even come remotely close, at all. You just can't compare our flag win to OPs. There are way more variables involved.



Confusion.
[/quote]


I wasn't. I was making an observation of how little of a difference there was in the NS of the winner of this round and the winner of last round, given the massive changes in the game.

I think that it was SoADarthCyfe6 that started the comparison of the two flag wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='dealmaster13' timestamp='1303325467' post='2694771']
But look at the #40 NS for rounds 4-12, something unnatural occured in rounds 13-15 and I was even in round 13 and somehow ended up with 1k infra in second place, but I can't remember what happened.
[/quote]

I recall that in Rounds 13 and 14, OP was involved in round long wars. I think that a couple of other alliances were also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1303320995' post='2694723']
It is actually interesting that given all the game changes this round, the winner had a NS of 37,076.122 while the prior round winner was at 32,000.000. That is only a 16% difference.
[/quote]

To come back to this very briefly, taking me as an example, getting to 35k NS, I can only assume the guy the won round 15 hadn't managed 500k casualties nor taken 13 nukes or more with in the region of 5000-6000 infra damages, or even the equivalent second placed or third placed man? So taking these things into consideration, I think it's fair to say that there has been a visible improvement in quality due to the game changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...