Who would win

[HHAYD]

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?

Edited June 4, 2011 by HHAYD

[Deimos27]

[quote name='NoFish' timestamp='1307218182' post='2723867']
Honestly, Umbrella should just become a rogue alliance. Their top tier is so much absurdly stronger than anyone else's and they're so well liked I don't think any coalition would be able to assemble that could take them down if they just decided to up and attack some people they didn't like.
[/quote]

Remember comments like these about TOP, before the (in)famous preemptive strike? Maybe not the 'well liked' part, but this is familiar. MK even made some propaganda about it.

[Hyperion321]

[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.

[Drai]

There'd be some seriously hurt nations on the MK/Umb/PC side due to the upper tier not being able to help them after 1 round, but if you had to claim one side as the victor it's usually done based on the better upper tier at the end of the war so MK/Umb/PC.

Edited June 4, 2011 by Drai

[HHAYD]

[quote name='Hyperion321' timestamp='1307222912' post='2723912']
Umbrella doesn't recruit low NS people. Hell, they don't recruit anyone.
[/quote]
How do you replace your members that left due to joining other alliances, boredom, RL, or were quietly put to sleep by the Admin (permanently)?

[Natan]

[quote name='Deimos27' timestamp='1307222719' post='2723909']
Remember comments like these about TOP, before the (in)famous preemptive strike? Maybe not the 'well liked' part, but this is familiar. MK even made some propaganda about it.
[/quote]

Umbrella's motto is "never good enough" :>

[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]

First off, your math doesn't quite add up, if all of our low NS "recruits" leave, I think we'd have far more than 15 or 20 members. Second off, Umbrella has never had anyone leave during war for fear of their pixels, it isn't in the culture, especially for our lower tier nations. We don't let lower tier nations in easily after all, so they have to be fiercely loyal.

Or we could just put them all into peace mode, heh.

[Banksy]

You're all forgetting that Umbrella are bad at war.

[HHAYD]

[quote name='Natan' timestamp='1307225537' post='2723944']
First off, your math doesn't quite add up, if all of our low NS "recruits" leave, I think we'd have far more than 15 or 20 members. Second off, Umbrella has never had anyone leave during war for fear of their pixels, it isn't in the culture, especially for our lower tier nations. We don't let lower tier nations in easily after all, so they have to be fiercely loyal.

Or we could just put them all into peace mode, heh.
[/quote]
Every alliance experiences members leaving due to:

1. The members are bored of CN.

2. The members want to join another alliance (during peace time hopefully).

3. The members are too busy with RL to even check their nation.

4. They got in trouble with the Admin.


Unless if all of your members are actually computer-controlled, you're bound to lose at least a one member per year.

Edited June 4, 2011 by HHAYD

[eyriq]

[quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1307217581' post='2723861']
No one.
[/quote]

Pretty much this. That would be a horrible front to see develop from a political standpoint. Fun competitively though.

Though I must quip, we call GOON[size="1"]s[/size]

[Natan]

[quote name='HHAYD' timestamp='1307226099' post='2723953']
Every alliance experiences members leaving due to:

1. The members are bored of CN.

2. The members want to join another alliance (during peace time hopefully).

3. The members are too busy with RL to even check their nation.

4. They got in trouble with the Admin.


Unless if all of your members are actually computer-controlled, you're bound to lose at least a one member per year.
[/quote]

Of course we lose nations, but I don't understand how this relates to us losing a war?

[Banksy]

[quote name='HHAYD' timestamp='1307226099' post='2723953']
Every alliance experiences members leaving due to:

1. The members are bored of CN.

2. The members want to join another alliance (during peace time hopefully).

3. The members are too busy with RL to even check their nation.

4. They got in trouble with the Admin.


Unless if all of your members are actually computer-controlled, you're bound to lose at least a one member per year.
[/quote]
This doesn't prove anything you said earlier. You said that Umbrella's "lower tier" would leave the alliance (60 members apparently) because they were outnumbered. Now go and look at Umbrella's stats and come back.

[Lord Velox]

Umbreliures would win.
although i don't think it's fair having an extra alliance on the other side even if it does even out NS+numbers.

Edited June 4, 2011 by Lord Velox

[Baltus]

Everyone would die. UPN's the only one left alive and forms the New Hegemony.

This would be an interesting face off, but will most likely not happen. PC/MK/Umb have a larger coalition of allies, who together can simply overwhelm Val/DT/NoR/Asgard.

[Itsuki Koizumi]

[quote name='Antoine Roquentin' timestamp='1307217581' post='2723861']
No one.
[/quote]
look at roq being all modest

[pd73bassman]

Not going to happen, sorry zoom you are not getting any of my land


Kinda cool sitting down and thinking of great war matchups but I don't see this ever happening, so Roq is right when he says no one, but this would be a epic battle, probably the best CN has ever seen

[Xiphosis]

You'd have to be insane to think that lot could take on even Umbrella and get very far, to be honest.

[2burnt2eat]

Asg/NoR/Val/DT

[Bob]

Umbrella wins. Everyone else loses.
Umbrella nations can't be dragged down out of the top tier by the few nations Asg/DT/NoR/Val. They aid down and fund the war efforts on the lower tiers, where Asg/DT/NoR/Val would have the advantage. Everyone is decimated except for Umbrella.

~my two cents~

Also, not going to happen.

Edited June 5, 2011 by Penlugue Solaris

[JoshuaR]

[quote] Natan, Roq, and BJ are about as good of a command team you'll ever find, yet[/quote]
BJ?

[threefingeredguy]

[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1307216761' post='2723854']
In such a close fight much or most of Umbrella would be dragged down into the ranges with everyone else
[/quote]
I'm not sure that's the case. As our nations are much more tech-heavy than the ones in our range we would outputting way more damage. I know this last war doesn't provide many examples of a close fight in the upper tier, but based on what I saw NO ONE in Umbrella was even close to being in range of their targets when the war was over, even if the opponents did a great job. I know in a closer fight we would suffer more losses, but I don't think, given the fact that our NS goes down slower due to more of it being from tech and the fact that we do so much damage, that any Umbrella upper-tier nations would be able to participate in more than 2 rounds.

Edited June 5, 2011 by threefingeredguy

[lonewolfe2015]

Everyone would win.

[Azaghul]

[quote name='NoFish' timestamp='1307218182' post='2723867']
Honestly, Umbrella should just become a rogue alliance. Their top tier is so much absurdly stronger than anyone else's and they're so well liked I don't think any coalition would be able to assemble that could take them down if they just decided to up and attack some people they didn't like.
[/quote]
TOP was stronger at its height statistically, but still lost.

[quote name='Baltus' timestamp='1307240817' post='2724120']
This would be an interesting face off, but will most likely not happen. PC/MK/Umb have a larger coalition of allies, who together can simply overwhelm Val/DT/NoR/Asgard.
[/quote]
And there isn't any particular reason for it to happen, since as far as I know, there isn't any hostility or rivalry between the two groups. This discussion is just academic.

[quote name='threefingeredguy' timestamp='1307248047' post='2724211']
I'm not sure that's the case. As our nations are much more tech-heavy than the ones in our range we would outputting way more damage. I know this last war doesn't provide many examples of a close fight in the upper tier, but based on what I saw NO ONE in Umbrella was even close to being in range of their targets when the war was over, even if the opponents did a great job. I know in a closer fight we would suffer more losses, but I don't think, given the fact that our NS goes down slower due to more of it being from tech and the fact that we do so much damage, that any Umbrella upper-tier nations would be able to participate in more than 2 rounds.
[/quote]
Nearly all of the upper tier wars were 3 vs 1 in the last war, and most of the enemy nations that were hit were then hit again the next round, while few of ours top tier guys were hit after each round. Eventually they'd be out of range but I think many would end up fighting for 3 or 4 rounds, if it were more even.

[Buzz Lightyear]

I try to stay away from here, but i saw this, and i just had to join in. Ive never seen or heard of Aasgard's fighting skills, I hear Valhalla is pretty decent, and DT doesnt seem to be the same DT as they were before, and arent as scary. So id give this win to MK/Umb/PC

[threefingeredguy]

[quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1307248889' post='2724220']Nearly all of the upper tier wars were 3 vs 1 in the last war, and most of the enemy nations that were hit were then hit again the next round, while few of ours top tier guys were hit after each round. Eventually they'd be out of range but I think many would end up fighting for 3 or 4 rounds, if it were more even.
[/quote]
Yeah, I could be totally wrong. But I know if we lost all our infra and land, we'd still be fairly big from tech alone. Plus warchests

[Banksy]

[quote name='threefingeredguy' timestamp='1307249723' post='2724226']
Yeah, I could be totally wrong. But I know if we lost all our infra and land, we'd still be fairly big from tech alone. Plus warchests
[/quote]
See: TOP.

It could be done then. You are also forgetting that 1) both sides have warchests and 2) warchests are depleted very quickly if the two sides are evenly matched (again, see TOP).