Joseph Black Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 So not the way most QnA's work, but I've always wondered a few things and this is your chance to answer them. Is Doom-House a bloc or a MDoAP? Why are NPO or MK given so much reverence in terms of their ability to fight? Why is it considered unacceptable to disband alliances? Impose huge reps? Declare war on the basis of "I don't like you" Has Sparta ever lost a war? Why was there so much animosity toward UPN in the last war? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
white majik Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 [quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1312786363' post='2774714'] So not the way most QnA's work, but I've always wondered a few things and this is your chance to answer them. Is Doom-House a bloc or a MDoAP? Why are NPO or MK given so much reverence in terms of their ability to fight? Why is it considered unacceptable to disband alliances? Impose huge reps? Declare war on the basis of "I don't like you" Has Sparta ever lost a war? Why was there so much animosity toward UPN in the last war? [/quote] Dumbhouse is a MDoAP treaty Typically the alliance who have fought the most, tend to be seen as good fighters. NPO, Val, MK. Doesnt mean its true because Polaris keeps getting stomped and they still cant fight. No, they have never lost. UPN is/was pretty much a joke, some one wanted to rid the planet of the trash that is known as UPN. It didnt work out. Any other questions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Black Posted August 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 [quote name='white majik' timestamp='1312789061' post='2774730'] Dumbhouse is a MDoAP treaty Typically the alliance who have fought the most, tend to be seen as good fighters. NPO, Val, MK. Doesnt mean its true because Polaris keeps getting stomped and they still cant fight. No, they have never lost. UPN is/was pretty much a joke, some one wanted to rid the planet of the trash that is known as UPN. It didnt work out. Any other questions? [/quote] Is everything discovered, I mean everyone seems to say the same stuff about wars and how to fight/win them, is there really any strategy to it, or are people just to lazy to find out? Why is MK considered the top alliance (maybe I just read to much into it)? Why does public opinion matter? Why is the OCC/IC line so thin Thank you for answering, I've got a few more, just didn't want to post them all at once. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1312786363' post='2774714'] Has Sparta ever lost a war? [/quote] Did you mean to ask "Has Sparta ever entered a war they thought they might lose?" [quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1312789305' post='2774733'] Why does public opinion matter? [/quote] Two words: Vox. Populi. Edited August 8, 2011 by Schattenmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Black Posted August 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1312789424' post='2774735'] Did you mean to ask "Has Sparta ever entered a war they thought they might lose?" [/quote] No, has Sparta ever lost a war? Regardless of their reasoning for jumping sides, I didn't know if they had. [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1312789424' post='2774735'] Two words: Vox. Populi. [/quote] With all due respect, Vox couldn't happen again. There isn't a single enemy that you can point to and call the bad guy. For the most part, SF is simply the front man of the next war because they have a target on their backs. While MK who played the same if not far worse role enjoys the safety that their politically connections afford them. Edited August 8, 2011 by Muddog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
white majik Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 [quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1312789305' post='2774733'] Is everything discovered, I mean everyone seems to say the same stuff about wars and how to fight/win them, is there really any strategy to it, or are people just to lazy to find out? Why is MK considered the top alliance (maybe I just read to much into it)? Why does public opinion matter? Why is the OCC/IC line so thin Thank you for answering, I've got a few more, just didn't want to post them all at once. [/quote] Activity and coordination= being good at war. If you have alot of experience with the war system you find a few tricks but mostly its about being active. I wouldnt say MK is the top alliance, right now no alliance stands out as being the top alliance. MK is a big player in the political world. They are seen as the movers and shakers, not sure if this is because they are more active then some alliances on the OWF or what. Public swings, and with that you have swing alliances. People who dont want to risk infra in a losing war. Thats why curbstomps are so common, So yeah public opinion is a big part of the world and I would say the line is thin because outside of OBR no one actually RPs as a nation ruler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Black Posted August 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 (edited) [quote name='white majik' timestamp='1312789973' post='2774746'] Activity and coordination= being good at war. If you have alot of experience with the war system you find a few tricks but mostly its about being active. I wouldnt say MK is the top alliance, right now no alliance stands out as being the top alliance. MK is a big player in the political world. They are seen as the movers and shakers, not sure if this is because they are more active then some alliances on the OWF or what. Public swings, and with that you have swing alliances. People who dont want to risk infra in a losing war. Thats why curbstomps are so common, So yeah public opinion is a big part of the world and I would say the line is thin because outside of OBR no one actually RPs as a nation ruler. [/quote] In the development of this community, what played the contributing factor to the style of RP that exists on bob, its different than most others I've seen? Why is so much stock placed into the size of a nation? Has the underdog ever won a war (by the time of Karma there was enough knowledge to know NPO was going to lose so that war does not count) Edited August 8, 2011 by Muddog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 [quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1312789904' post='2774745'] No, has Sparta ever lost a war? Regardless of their reasoning for jumping sides, I didn't know if they had.[/quote] Yes but my question has more meaning than your question [quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1312789904' post='2774745'] With all due respect, Vox couldn't happen again. There isn't a single enemy that you can point to and call the bad guy. For the most part, SF is simply the front man of the next war because they have a target on their backs. While MK who played the same if not far worse role enjoys the safety that their politically connections afford them. [/quote] I didn't say that Vox will ever happen again. It is a triumph of Vox that the current climate doesn't allow for a reformation. You asked why public opinion matters, the answer is Vox Populi, whose efforts in public opinion made public opinion matter. It is the people to which alliance governments answer, and it is the people who Vox mobilized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 [quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1312790265' post='2774751'] Has the underdog ever won a war (by the time of Karma there was enough knowledge to know NPO was going to lose so that war does not count) [/quote] FAN won VietFAN II, mind you the guerrilla war went on for like a year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
white majik Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 [quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1312790265' post='2774751'] In the development of this community, what played the contributing factor to the style of RP that exists on bob, its different than most others I've seen? Why is so much stock placed into the size of a nation? Has the underdog ever won a war (by the time of Karma there was enough knowledge to know NPO was going to lose so that war does not count) [/quote] Honestly Not sure about the RP question NS=power to actually implement/extend your power over other alliances. Here is the problem tho, would you rather have 20 huge 100k ns nations or 100 30k nations? Theres power in numbers, so a small elite alliance like Creole who has 20 nations all around 100k ns is strong but they could easily be beat by enough nations. Fan jumps to mind. But in reality up to the week of the break out of Karma, the sides were undecided and the numbers seemed to be in NPOs favor. If everyone didnt cancel on NPO and or NPO didnt attack mid negotiation it could have went a whole lot differently Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krack Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 [quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1312790265' post='2774751'] Has the underdog ever won a war (by the time of Karma there was enough knowledge to know NPO was going to lose so that war does not count) [/quote] I think you have a short memory. The Karma War was not even close to a foregone conclusion. There were many things that could have easily swung that war the other way. And on the night of NPO's attack, most had no idea what was going to happen and many thought the Karma side would lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Black Posted August 9, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 [quote name='Krack' timestamp='1312843942' post='2775264'] I think you have a short memory. The Karma War was not even close to a foregone conclusion. There were many things that could have easily swung that war the other way. And on the night of NPO's attack, most had no idea what was going to happen and many thought the Karma side would lose. [/quote] Hind sight is 20/20 and from what I've read on it ( I wasn't here) it should have been more obvious. The length between wars has increased while the relative damage done during wars has decreased, why is this and what impacts this effect the most. There seems to be a huge dislike toward micro alliances, is there a real reason behind this or is it individually driven? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 [quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1312861774' post='2775486'] Hind sight is 20/20 and from what I've read on it ( I wasn't here) it should have been more obvious. The length between wars has increased while the relative damage done during wars has decreased, why is this and what impacts this effect the most. There seems to be a huge dislike toward micro alliances, is there a real reason behind this or is it individually driven? [/quote] I would say the length has increased and the relative damage done has decreased due to the evolution of strategies as the game has matured and the organization of groups of alliance to better repair the damage post war. What I would say affects this the most is likely folks simply learning how to govern better in ways that are more preserving in a conflict. Micro Alliances are disliked, from what I've seen, for the same reason SPAM is disliked. Too much of something, in this case.. alliances. If we had an alliance for every opinion on how we thought Bob should be run then we would have nearly nothing but single man alliances and lots of them (likely one per nation). That said, unless the ideas of a micro-alliance take hold and it grows beyond its micro state, they are sometimes seen as being constituted by members to arrogant to group with those who think similarly to them and simply too individualistic/independent. Personally, I have no dislike of micro-alliances. They're test beds for new communities. Some will grow.. and some will fade. The ones that grow may actually serve to add to the community. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Savage Man Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1312786363' post='2774714'] So not the way most QnA's work, but I've always wondered a few things and this is your chance to answer them. Is Doom-House a bloc or a MDoAP? Why are NPO or MK given so much reverence in terms of their ability to fight? Why is it considered unacceptable to disband alliances? Impose huge reps? Declare war on the basis of "I don't like you" Has Sparta ever lost a war? Why was there so much animosity toward UPN in the last war? [/quote] DH is an MDoAP, there is no mechanism for adding members. The GOONS-Umbrella-MK trio has been a tight group for a long time and DH was a good way to demonstrate that in the wake of MK's treaty reset. I don't know who told you NPO could fight well. MK I guess have fought a lot of well-regarded opponents so they deserve whatever reputation they have for being good fighters. It's generally a !@#$%* thing to do to break apart a community that doesn't wish to be broken apart. Reps are usually disparaged for extending the period of time between wars, at least that's the rationale I usually see. People like CBs because with no scarcity to spark and justify conflict, CBs create a bit more sophistication than just outright attacking people for no reason. I don't see the attraction personally. Sparta has never lost a war I don't think. Because UPN is a bad alliance. [quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1312789305' post='2774733'] Is everything discovered, I mean everyone seems to say the same stuff about wars and how to fight/win them, is there really any strategy to it, or are people just to lazy to find out? Why is MK considered the top alliance (maybe I just read to much into it)? Why does public opinion matter? Why is the OCC/IC line so thin Thank you for answering, I've got a few more, just didn't want to post them all at once. [/quote] The metagame has more or less been discovered since the game has gone on for a long time without any changes. The flip side is that it takes a lot of effort and teamwork to achieve it. MK were (before their treaty reset) the keystone of the treaty web and generally all treaty chains led to MK. There were hardly any situations that didn't involve MK in some way and so MK usually popped their heads into any evolving situation that could endanger their interests. I don't blame them for voluntarily giving up that position, it sounds like a huge pain. Public opinion does matter though its not really based on the OWF and more on what alliance memberships pressure their leaders over. There are consequences for PR-type things ranging from the relatively minor (i.e. BN's cancellation on us because of GOONS various escapades in late 2010) to pretty major (NPO's treaty regime falling apart in part due to negative perceptions of them from the general public). [quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1312790265' post='2774751'] In the development of this community, what played the contributing factor to the style of RP that exists on bob, its different than most others I've seen? Why is so much stock placed into the size of a nation? Has the underdog ever won a war (by the time of Karma there was enough knowledge to know NPO was going to lose so that war does not count) [/quote] Not sure what you mean. A big nation can cause serious damage and as we saw in the last war, can even exert considerable influence on the course of events in the low tiers. I don't think a clear underdog has ever won but there have been wars where the end result was in question right up to the beginning. Not every war is predetermined. [quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1312861774' post='2775486'] Hind sight is 20/20 and from what I've read on it ( I wasn't here) it should have been more obvious. The length between wars has increased while the relative damage done during wars has decreased, why is this and what impacts this effect the most. There seems to be a huge dislike toward micro alliances, is there a real reason behind this or is it individually driven? [/quote] I was in Vox Populi during Karma and I had been away for the very beginning but from the very beginning the coalition projections were in favor of Karma. I guess somebody else can elaborate in more detail if the true outcome was ever really in question. The need for warchests and protracted periods of tech accumulation means that wars are put off. Recovery takes a long time. As far as damage decreasing, I'm not sure if I agree with you, high-tech WRC battlesupported nuclear attacks can cause well over 1000 infra damage in the highest tiers. Peace mode tactics can cause a war to drag on with not a lot of damage being done I suppose. I guess people like to see things happen and think that micros somehow add to the "complexity" of the treaty web and make things happening "more difficult". I don't agree. Most micros don't do much, this is true but they don't really prevent anything from happening either. They sit around, sell tech, report in to fight for whoever in the big war, then go back to sitting around. Nothing obstructionist there. Edited August 9, 2011 by Chief Savage Man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
white majik Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 Kill all mircros, they should be raided to death and or merge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Black Posted August 9, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 [quote name='white majik' timestamp='1312867787' post='2775599'] Kill all mircros, they should be raided to death and or merge [/quote] Might be interesting to see a few micro's merge into something huge, if it were possible to get over the personal ego of most individuals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vol Navy Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 [quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1312786363' post='2774714'] Why are NPO or MK given so much reverence in terms of their ability to fight? [/quote] MK was good during Karma when we fought them. Now, not at all. Any nation below about 90k NS there that I faced was an inactive turtle. Even people with huge war chests wouldn't bother with fighting back for the most part. I fought a few with billion dollar+ war chests who wouldn't even bother with buying back to 1000 infra to nuke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unknown Smurf Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 I think the problem with mircos is that there are so many of them allied to opposite sides of the web. They don't show up on BobJ's MDP web generator program, but they complicate the web a LOT. When I look at only the top 80 alliances in an MDP web, its actually quite discernible who fits where. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rokula Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 [quote name='white majik' timestamp='1312867787' post='2775599'] Kill all mircros, they should be raided to death and or merge [/quote] Then you eliminated or pissed off more than half of CN's player-base, not a smart move for the future of this game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanilla Napalm Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 [quote name='Rokula' timestamp='1312873811' post='2775644'] Then you eliminated or pissed off more than half of CN's player-base, not a smart move for the future of this game. [/quote] I fail to see the negative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeonidasRexII Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1312786363' post='2774714'] So not the way most QnA's work, but I've always wondered a few things and this is your chance to answer them. 1. Is Doom-House a bloc or a MDoAP? 2. Why are NPO or MK given so much reverence in terms of their ability to fight? 3. Why is it considered unacceptable to disband alliances? Impose huge reps? Declare war on the basis of "I don't like you" 4. Has Sparta ever lost a war? 5. Why was there so much animosity toward UPN in the last war? [/quote] 1. Doomhouse is a bloc for the simple reason that more than two alliances are involved. Another reason that they can be considered a bloc is that the three alliances involved, Umbrella, MK, and GOONs, are all different in their composition and their approach to FA. Umbrella is very top heavy and tends to avoid the public eye, MK is more balanced NS wise and tends to seek out the public eye, GOONs are bottom heavy and attract attention without trying. In both respects all three alliances complement each other very well. They have great coverage as far as NS goes from just under 200K all the way down to beginner nations. FA wise Umbrellas quite style is offset by MKs leadership on the world stage and GOONs reckless abandon. 2. Both alliances have longevity working for them here as well as perseverance through difficult times. That longevity has allowed them to face a huge number of opponents who, if they're truthful like me, have to give them all due respect after facing them on the battlefield. I've never faced NPO in battle, but the three MK nations I faced last war lived up to their rep in spades. 3. I think it's hypocritical to say that I can be here, but you can't. Reps I don't know. As a negotiable item large reps means either you weren't ready for war and would pay anything to get out of them (your fault) or you weren't a good enough negotiator to get the reps pushed down (again your fault). DoW's of I don't like you hit on my first point, but go a bit further. When those types of DoWs happen there are usually only a small number of people from both alliances involved. To inflate that dislike to an inter-alliance war is dragging hundreds of nations on both sides in a fight they had nothing to do with. 4. Don't know, don't care. 5. Not sure exactly what you're talking about, but the UPN troubles started well before the last war. All the way to the summer 2010 UPN had several run-ins with GOONs and company. What the genesis was of each of those problems I don't know but it seemed that there was a new issue every couple months. By the time the war broke out feelings I'm sure were very raw and wars just make those situations worse. Edited August 9, 2011 by LeonidasRexII Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeonidasRexII Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 [quote name='Muddog' timestamp='1312861774' post='2775486'] The length between wars has increased while the relative damage done during wars has decreased, why is this and what impacts this effect the most. [/quote] There are two main factors that have driven the increase in the time between wars, Time and what I call the Sifting Effect. As Planet Bob and the nations that reside thereon age those nations gain in experience and size. Older nations know that to be successful you need money and large caches of tech. The larger the nation the more of each you need and so as nations grow so does the time it takes to become truly battle ready. Older nations have passed down the necessity of the warchest and tech to younger nations and so the prep time even for smaller nations has grown substantially since the creation of Bob. The Sifting effect occurs when dislike alliances encounter each other in the FA realm. The differences that eventually lead to conflict drive the opposing alliances apart and post-war each side seeks to find others of like mind in order to make themselves more secure. It's in this way that wars tend to 'sift' alliances into like groupings, and as each group grows it becomes less likely that they'll be attacked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Savage Man Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 [quote name='LeonidasRexII' timestamp='1312879987' post='2775665'] 1. Doomhouse is a bloc for the simple reason that more than one alliance is involved. [/quote] Every bilateral treaty ever is a bloc. - you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 What made you decide, balls on the flag? Do you see your alliance signing any new treaties within the near future? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Black Posted August 9, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 [quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1312886681' post='2775703'] What made you decide, balls on the flag? Do you see your alliance signing any new treaties within the near future? [/quote] Just thought it'd be a good way to attract people to our announcements, and no I've lost interest in XIII Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.