Jump to content

Top "war-ready" Alliances


jerdge

Recommended Posts

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1314160561' post='2787498']
ODN would defeat NPO (or, for that matter, NpO) in a war. Whether or not that's from avoiding hard wars is irrelevant. The fact remains that we have a much stronger upper tier than either Order, which is why it's hilarious that they're ranked so highly on this list.
[/quote]
That NPO just got attacked right after finishing their terms from Karma War might make you think that, but in a one on one war until either surrenders the more war experienced nations might fair better. An upper tier who's stat's have been preserved by avoiding a hard nuclear war mostly thus far, who's stats would drop quickly in a nuclear war with a more war experienced alliance who still has their military wonders, the ones with mostly stats to brag about might not be at the advantage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 154
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1314161131' post='2787502']
That NPO just got attacked right after finishing their terms from Karma War might make you think that, but in a one on one war until either surrenders the more war experienced nations might fair better. An upper tier who's stat's have been preserved by avoiding a hard nuclear war mostly thus far, who's stats would drop quickly in a nuclear war with a more war experienced alliance who still has their military wonders, the ones with mostly stats to brag about might not be at the advantage.
[/quote]


ummm...what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1314160561' post='2787498']
ODN would defeat NPO (or, for that matter, NpO) in a war. Whether or not that's from avoiding hard wars is irrelevant. The fact remains that we have a much stronger upper tier than either Order, which is why it's hilarious that they're ranked so highly on this list.
[/quote]

In close wars, it is not so much the statistics that make the difference, it is the resolve. I'm unsure if ODN has the resolve that NPO or NpO do. I think they would see victory in their sights and they would be willing to push on until the members of ODN started crying and gave up.

Rather interesting, unbiased take you've got there, though.

Edited by memoryproblems
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Zoomzoomzoom' timestamp='1314161416' post='2787506']
ummm...what?
[/quote]
NPO has fought a lot more wars than ODN, so I think their war experience and still having their military wonders would more than make up for whatever stat advantages ODN has over NPO in a one on one.

Edited by Methrage
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1314161590' post='2787508']
NPO has fought a lot more wars than ODN, so I think their war experience and still having their military wonders would more than make up for whatever stat advantages ODN has over NPO in a one on one.
[/quote]

Excellent point, NPO has 212 MPs and 181 SDIs, by comparison ODN has 127 MPs and 139 SDIs.

I understand that there is a differential in members, but NPO's advantage in those two wonders would work in their favor in a lengthy war, which it seems is about the only type they fight anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='memoryproblems' timestamp='1314161569' post='2787507']
In close wars, it is not so much the statistics that make the difference, it is the resolve. I'm unsure if ODN has the resolve that NPO or NpO do. I think they would see victory in their sights and they would be willing to push on until the members of ODN started crying and gave up.

Rather interesting, unbiased take you've got there, though.
[/quote]

I'm not sure it would be as close as you're implying. Wars these days really are a matter of hard statistics, unless the people involved have had zero experience of war (like GPA.) Resolve comes into it somewhat.. an alliance like Legion would fold over in days... but I think determination and resilience is generated by activity. ODN may not have a major presence on the OWF, but our boards are extremely active and have been for a very long time. Granted, NPO are more active than we are (they're probably the most active alliance in the game) but as I've said the hard statistics are more important.

[quote name='memoryproblems' timestamp='1314161874' post='2787511']
Excellent point, NPO has 212 MPs and 181 SDIs, by comparison ODN has 127 MPs and 139 SDIs.
[/quote]

Yeah that's true, but loads of their wonders are in nations which have been severely beaten down. In the DH-NPO war, I seriously considered joining MK and attacking NPO, but I was like 15k NS and NPO's 20-10k NS bracket was full of nations with full wonders and even WRCs. MK got absolutely owned in that tier. Because the game is nearing the end of its life, there are increasing numbers of nations in this category, where they've been beaten down and never rebuilt. As demonstrated by the last war, NPO's 15k NS nations with WRCs didn't do them much good, because as I keep reiterating wars are won in the upper tier. NPO's upper tier was so ineffective that they shifted the entire thing to peacemode. Hence why ODN would thrash them in a war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1314162339' post='2787516']
Yeah that's true, but loads of their wonders are in nations which have been severely beaten down. In the DH-NPO war, I seriously considered joining MK and attacking NPO, but I was like 15k NS and NPO's 20-10k NS bracket was full of nations with full wonders and even WRCs. MK got absolutely owned in that tier. Because the game is nearing the end of its life, there are increasing numbers of nations in this category, where they've been beaten down and never rebuilt. As demonstrated by the last war, NPO's 15k NS nations with WRCs didn't do them much good, because as I keep reiterating wars are won in the upper tier. NPO's upper tier was so ineffective that they shifted the entire thing to peacemode. Hence why ODN would thrash them in a war.
[/quote]

It wasn't that they were ineffective, it was that they were vastly outnumbered.

From the perspective of a strategist, why do you fight in a strength range where you've got nothing to gain from fighting? I think your underestimating how long NPO would be willing to keep a war going. Its been a long time since they've fought a war where their side wasn't outnumbered by more then 3:1, I think in a 1 on 1 against ODN, they'd see a glimmer of hope and would be willing to fight perhaps harder and longer then ever before if it was necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' timestamp='1314162072' post='2787513']
Does anyone here think MHA could defeat anyone in a war? I want a show of hands.
[/quote]
MHA can help another alliance win by absorbing a lot of fire power that could be hitting other enemies, similar to how ODN helped DH win in the war with NPO by getting a large amount of firepower that would be directed at DH hitting them instead. MHA are harmless, do they even they know war on their own? :P

Edited by Methrage
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='memoryproblems' timestamp='1314162715' post='2787520']
It wasn't that they were ineffective, it was that they were vastly outnumbered.

From the perspective of a strategist, why do you fight in a strength range where you've got nothing to gain from fighting? I think your underestimating how long NPO would be willing to keep a war going. Its been a long time since they've fought a war where their side wasn't outnumbered by more then 3:1, I think in a 1 on 1 against ODN, they'd see a glimmer of hope and would be willing to fight perhaps harder and longer then ever before if it was necessary.
[/quote]

I have to say, as I keep imagining this potential NPO-ODN war, it could actually be quite fun. xD Unfortunately treaties and all that boring stuff would be pulled into play and I can't see either alliance ever going for something like this. Maybe one day just before everyone decides to pack up and leave CN, we could duke it out and finally get our chance to settle scores from the Citrus War. :P

Anyways...

How would NPO's determination to fight a long war prove to their benefit? If anything, it would mean that we had more time to beat down their upper tier. Remember also that ODN's tech levels in our 100k+ nations are actually really good (with some exceptions, but every single nation in our top ten has a good tech level) while NPO's average tech level in the 100k+ nations is much lower.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='sir pwnage' timestamp='1314153017' post='2787385']
None of these stats are relevant. Here are the top 20 alliances ranked on the only important factors.

Total cruise missiles:

WTF: 4289
MHA: 1817
TDO: 1517
GPA: 1108
TLR: 1022
Sparta: 965
Fark: 890
Non Grata: 835
IRON: 801
GATO: 713
TOP: 641
VE: 589
NPO: 524
Umbrella: 467
The Legion: 406
ODN: 340
NpO: 332
NEW: 302
R&R: 278
MK: 32

Cruise missiles/member:

WTF (24.509/member)
TDO (11.492/member)
Umbrella (5.022/member)
TLR (4.985/member)
GPA (4.969/member)
TOP (4.820/member)
MHA (3.221/member)
Fark (3.134/member)
Non Grata (3.070/member)
Sparta (2.797/member)
GATO (2.528/member)
VE (2.485/member)
IRON (2.023/member)
NEW (1.819/member)
NPO (1.248/member)
ODN (1.185/member)
The Legion (1.728/member)
R&R (1.168/member)
NpO (1.149/member)
MK (.227/member)

All hail WTF o/
[/quote]


Glad we didn't make this list :lol1:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My dear Shantamantan, no offence taken. You should have probably placed it historically, and the Ethiopian army and population proved to be extremely resilient (heroic, one would say). Many would be horrified to know at what lows the fascists went to bend them.
It's something the Italians (that remember) are still ashamed for, and it was also a shame the indifference showed by the other great powers of the time.
But that's off topic, anyway.

Thanks memoryproblems and Kalasin for your interesting debate.


[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' timestamp='1314162072' post='2787513']Does anyone here think MHA could defeat anyone in a war? I want a show of hands.[/quote]
Having been there I know that the willingness to fight of the MHA is vastly underrated. Their peaceful nature and the fact that they never faced really adverse odds (which can be or not the result of opportunism, that can't be seriously discussed here as people would just stick to their convictions) brought people to think that they're unable to stomach a real brawl.
Unless things changed dramatically since my time there, they are, I assure you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1314159945' post='2787494']
Depends on the Military Wonders, no SDI means your nation is an easy target to burn with no wasted nukes. No Manhatten Project you can't nuke back, no WRC and you can only build one nuke a day instead of 2. So big tech advantages can easily be worn down by a nation with no tech compared to one with no military wonders.
[/quote]


I am referring to the fact that wars in this day are fought mostly by nations with at least a full set of military wonders.

Even last war when I was knocked down from near 100k ns to around 20k ns I was facing nuke capable nations the entire time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='AAAAAAAAAAGGGG' timestamp='1314159007' post='2787485']
It actually had nothing to do with Gre's allies not helping them. Gre did that entire fight by themselves alone. Gre had a huge upper tier advantage in that war and could have easily held out for much longer. The reason they lost was the fact that Ramirus alienated his own alliance to the point where his own members began to leave one by one, and when IRON gained the advantage, they attacked head on.
[/quote]


GRE still had a large upper tier and Matt Miller brought quite a few of them down to where the rest of IRON could reach them, then they would invariably get swamped under and sent to the bottom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1314168872' post='2787554']
I am referring to the fact that wars in this day are fought mostly by nations with at least a full set of military wonders.

Even last war when I was knocked down from near 100k ns to around 20k ns I was facing nuke capable nations the entire time.
[/quote]
While most might have MP by now, around half that many also have SDI. Then less than half of those have WRC limiting them to half as many nuke purchases, which in a long term war as nukes reserves are used up makes a difference. Also with Hidden Nuke Silo, you can hold on to at least 5 nukes to use whenever without worrying about them being spied. So the wonder make a big difference for those who have them and those who don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1314170448' post='2787559']
While most might have MP by now, around half that many also have SDI. Then less than half of those have WRC limiting them to half as many nuke purchases, which in a long term war as nukes reserves are used up makes a difference. Also with Hidden Nuke Silo, you can hold on to at least 5 nukes to use whenever without worrying about them being spied. So the wonder make a big difference for those who have them and those who don't.
[/quote]


Admittedly I look mainly at our alliance where we have 106 MP/94SDI. Our WRC numbers are a bit lower due to the fact that many of our nations have trouble getting to 8500 infra and having a war chest left over after buying a WRC due to very frequent and long nuclear wars we've ended up in the past 2 years.

Still, most of the fighting you are referencing where a full compliment of wonders is going to be matched up with someone who doesn't have them is going to be after the nation with full wonders has been sunk to the bottom by nations with higher tech and all the wonders.

You aren't going to find many 50,000+ NS nations in most war ready alliances who don't have all the military wonders.

Edited by Vol Navy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' timestamp='1314162072' post='2787513']
Does anyone here think MHA could defeat anyone in a war? I want a show of hands.
[/quote]

Yeah, MHA could probably defeat a majority of alliances in this game 1 on 1 due to a number of factors.

Saying otherwise is either ignorant or purposefully dense.

Edit:

I forgot the obligatory "dig on MHA," because it makes me [i]edgy[/i] or something.

"I heard MHA's 3,335 nukes don't actually detonate, nor do they rebuy their nukes after using them."

Edited by IYIyTh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1314168955' post='2787555']
GRE still had a large upper tier and Matt Miller brought quite a few of them down to where the rest of IRON could reach them, then they would invariably get swamped under and sent to the bottom.
[/quote]

The point is that the "quite a few" Matt Miller brought down was nothing compared to the amount that deleted or left. Gre ended that war with something like 16 members due to deletions and people leaving. That did more damage than IRON did.

Also, I'd like to see an MHA vs. None war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1314148704' post='2787313']
TSO is just the remainder of the upper tier of a sanctioned alliance that abandoned said original alliance and now calls itself 'elite'. Given its huge levels of inactivity I wouldn't put it amongst the top alliances anyway.
[/quote]

Just wondering, you know we are hugely inactive how? I promise you that's not the case :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1314156619' post='2787455']
I don't think cruise missiles per nation matters when nations aren't at war, since you can buy as many as you want to use them without letting them get destroyed when attacked.
[/quote]

I get the feeling the CM list was a joke... Why would anyone keep CM's on hand in peacetime, unless they're trying to boost their NS?

Also, I think some people are perceiving the original list as "Who would do better in a war," not "War-Ready" as the title states. For War-Ready I think Avg Nukes per person is a better indicator of readiness instead of total nukes, though there could be some sort of middle ground using both metrics.

And I have to agree with TheMadStork :) Quiet maybe, inactive we are not.

Cheers for TSO making the top 20, and a tip of my hat to the other alliances on the list!

Edited by Krispy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1314163175' post='2787525']
I have to say, as I keep imagining this potential NPO-ODN war, it could actually be quite fun. xD Unfortunately treaties and all that boring stuff would be pulled into play and I can't see either alliance ever going for something like this. Maybe one day just before everyone decides to pack up and leave CN, we could duke it out and finally get our chance to settle scores from the Citrus War. :P

Anyways...

How would NPO's determination to fight a long war prove to their benefit? If anything, it would mean that we had more time to beat down their upper tier. Remember also that ODN's tech levels in our 100k+ nations are actually really good (with some exceptions, but every single nation in our top ten has a good tech level) while NPO's average tech level in the 100k+ nations is much lower.
[/quote]
ODN does not have the resolve or structure to fight a serious prolonged war. That is why Vox decided to focus on ODN when we got pro-active, and that's why ODN never fights the main combatants in a war. Your upper tier are spoiled brats who expect to import tech during war, you recruit during war and depend on new recruits, your democracy puts you at a disadvantage against NPO's autocracy, the appallingly small percentage of ODNistas that vote (less than 15%) make it incredibly easy for disgruntled warriors to bring things down at home, and you have not fought a serious war in a long time. Your upper tier might swamp NPO's, but all that means is that ODN's nations smaller than 50k are stuck holding the bill facing the whole of NPO and their matured set of wonders. "Wars are won in the upper tier" is fun to chant, but you let 3/4 of an alliance eat nukes while watching their top tier buddies buy tech and eat bon-bons and watch how quick ODN finds itself with nothing [i]but [/i]a top tier, and that's not the kind of victory an alliance can handle.

Edited by Schattenmann
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='wickedj' timestamp='1314141321' post='2787217']
Your list sucks. it includes people who avoid war/nukes/any kind of damage at all cost
[/quote]

I will wreck your nation up >:o:wub: lol


Now on to serious bsns.

It's all about the money and wonders. If you have the wonders that's cool but if your not stocking up a couple billions then whats the point of having them ? I believe the most determining factor for a war ready list would be warchest average between nation strengths compared to other alliances. But hey that's just me. . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...