Nigro Nigronious Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1314201956' post='2787684'] -snip- [/quote] That's the most sense i've heard in a while. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCRABT Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 [quote name='sir pwnage' timestamp='1314186347' post='2787613'] 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. [/quote] They would have lost regardless. They had a strong upper tier but it was not large enough to sustain a war with a base that large. We were 100% committed to seeing the war out to the end, even if they had managed to retain their members they would have been worn down, we had enough nations with MP's to keep them in nuclear anarchy to prevent them collecting. Sure the process would have taken a lot longer but ultimately the majority of our nations were able to operate without penalty while Gremlins would have been continually worn down and not just by Matt Miller I might add. We had an entire squad of reserves known as the "Gizmo squad" many of whom joined from foreign alliances just to slog it out. Ramlins lack of reserve made the job quicker it didn't change the end result. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daikos Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 [quote name='Homeboy' timestamp='1314202868' post='2787689'] I will wreck your nation up > 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. . . [/quote] We will be rolling you at midnight for your slot on this ever so prestigious list. Hehehehehe. slot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chefjoe Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 [quote name='jerdge' timestamp='1314167825' post='2787551'] 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. [/quote] Easy to talk about fighting and how much you want to fight, but the bottom line is they DONT historicly fight and talk is cheap until the bullets start flying. Ive seen plenty of people talk about howe much ass they would kick and then when someone whom knows how to fight comes along and punches them in the face, they run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dochartaigh Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 [quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1314162339' post='2787516'] 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] Weren't Legion the ones who survived under the rule of NPO without buddying up to an Order like ODN did? ODN has only survived by switching to whichever side guarantees them a win. There is a reason why ODN was known as Optional Defense Network. To this day, ODN has not been truly battle-tested whereas not only has both Orders (in multiple wars) but Legion has as well. I am not here to state that Legion is the best, we have seen they are not. But they have far more resolve and backbone than anything ODN has shown. [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. [/quote] Again, there is this matter of resolve, or lack thereof, for ODN. Considering NPO's nations have had a short amount of time to rebuild, ODN's nations facing WRCs and nukes, even if in the mid-tiers, would most likely falter and leave ODN after a week or two. Why? They have never fought a war that was nothing more than a curbstomp. They have not even experienced an even match let alone a curbstomp of their own. The last time ODN was on the losing side, it was to NPO in 2006 and guess what ODN did, they swore an oath to NPO in order to avoid getting crushed. So, I don't honestly think ODN would thrash anyone in a war. NPO also kind of proved that upper tiers don't need to do much (i.e. Peace mode anyone) which means the sole advantage ODN has would be neutralized. And ODN does not have the same status as DH/FAN/NoR did in attempting to force NPO out of PM. Though I am going to be honest, if DT was not at war while NPO and ODN were ever to fight it out, I may join NPO just to get some action against ODN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Fingolfin Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 [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] They could defeat someone in the nature of a morbidly obese person smothering a midget in their fat rolls [quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1314179872' post='2787595'] 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. [/quote] Due to sheer weight of numbers I'm sure you could, or at least I would hope you could. Prevailing opinion seems to be that nation for nation, pound for pound so to speak, though that you're weaker than your stats would appear. Bloated. Now, whether that is true remains to be seen, faced with comparable forces will you fold like a house of cards or give it a good fight. Personally, I have no experience with MHA, so I'll reserve judgement for now. [quote name='MCRABT' timestamp='1314204139' post='2787700'] They would have lost regardless. They had a strong upper tier but it was not large enough to sustain a war with a base that large. We were 100% committed to seeing the war out to the end, even if they had managed to retain their members they would have been worn down, we had enough nations with MP's to keep them in nuclear anarchy to prevent them collecting. Sure the process would have taken a lot longer but ultimately the majority of our nations were able to operate without penalty while Gremlins would have been continually worn down and not just by Matt Miller I might add. We had an entire squad of reserves known as the "Gizmo squad" many of whom joined from foreign alliances just to slog it out. Ramlins lack of reserve made the job quicker it didn't change the end result. [/quote] Made me go back and dig through my PM's [IMG]http://i673.photobucket.com/albums/vv94/BBischoff242/CNGizmoSquad.jpg[/IMG] Fun times Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flak attack Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1314201956' post='2787684'] and that's why ODN never fights the main combatants in a war. [/quote] Yeah. Isn't that right TOP and IRON? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaazzam Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 As long as we have this cat, we'll be ready. [img]http://www.buddytv.com/articles/Image/Lost-characters/Matthew-Fox-as-Jack.jpg[/img] Nice to see a bunch of our good friends near the top of the list. Except for Thrawn. Last time we partied he took off with all the beer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 [quote name='chefjoe' timestamp='1314210293' post='2787727'] Easy to talk about fighting and how much you want to fight, but the bottom line is they DONT historicly fight and talk is cheap until the bullets start flying. Ive seen plenty of people talk about howe much ass they would kick and then when someone whom knows how to fight comes along and punches them in the face, they run. [/quote] Yeah, we don't fight at all, ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 [quote name='Lord Fingolfin' timestamp='1314212259' post='2787739'] Due to sheer weight of numbers I'm sure you could, or at least I would hope you could. Prevailing opinion seems to be that nation for nation, pound for pound so to speak, though that you're weaker than your stats would appear. Bloated. Now, whether that is true remains to be seen, faced with comparable forces will you fold like a house of cards or give it a good fight. Personally, I have no experience with MHA, so I'll reserve judgement for now. [/quote] Prevailing opinion around these boards is like taking the local ten year old on the playground's advice on something. Oh sure, MHA is bloated. Doesn't take much to see that and the lack of tech. Doesn't mean we don't have a solid mid-upper tier and/or structure enough to win a war. Just patently false. What's funny is I'm glad we are so "talked-down," because let's face it, the amount of damage any alliance would take attacking an alliance of this structure has enormous logistical problems and would likely get their proverbial "!@#$," rocked. Hell, even those who think you could "win," would "win," a war that no one would respect you for winning, meanwhile your precious pixels are torn to pieces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 [quote name='Homeboy' timestamp='1314202868' post='2787689'] I will wreck your nation up > 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. . . [/quote] I've often continued waging wars and luanching nukes daily for months with no warchest, making enough money off the war to keep bills paid, infrastructure up to at least 1k and weapons bought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 [quote name='Methrage' timestamp='1314222007' post='2787794'] I've often continued waging wars and luanching nukes daily for months with no warchest, making enough money off the war to keep bills paid, infrastructure up to at least 1k and weapons bought. [/quote] lol. Please stop pming my nations for tech deals when engaging in your shenanigans. They're so young and innocent... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerdge Posted August 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 [quote name='chefjoe' timestamp='1314210293' post='2787727']Easy to talk about fighting and how much you want to fight, but the bottom line is they DONT historicly fight and talk is cheap until the bullets start flying. Ive seen plenty of people talk about howe much ass they would kick and then when someone whom knows how to fight comes along and punches them in the face, they run.[/quote] This is only vaguely related to the topic thus I will cut it after this post. I just meant to say that some people would expect the MHA to fold quickly against adverse odds, but I don't see them do that, no more than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potato Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 [quote name='Dochartaigh' timestamp='1314212086' post='2787738'] Weren't Legion the ones who survived under the rule of NPO without buddying up to an Order like ODN did? ODN has only survived by switching to whichever side guarantees them a win. There is a reason why ODN was known as Optional Defense Network. To this day, ODN has not been truly battle-tested whereas not only has both Orders (in multiple wars) but Legion has as well. I am not here to state that Legion is the best, we have seen they are not. But they have far more resolve and backbone than anything ODN has shown. [/quote] I would call getting a viceroy and a subsequent Stockholm Syndrome closer to buddying than having a treaty with an Order that, historically, was always rather pro-ODN. But I guess that's just me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gizmo Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 (edited) [quote name='MCRABT' timestamp='1314204139' post='2787700'] They would have lost regardless. They had a strong upper tier but it was not large enough to sustain a war with a base that large. We were 100% committed to seeing the war out to the end, even if they had managed to retain their members they would have been worn down, we had enough nations with MP's to keep them in nuclear anarchy to prevent them collecting. Sure the process would have taken a lot longer but ultimately the majority of our nations were able to operate without penalty while Gremlins would have been continually worn down and not just by Matt Miller I might add. We had an entire squad of reserves known as the "Gizmo squad" many of whom joined from foreign alliances just to slog it out. Ramlins lack of reserve made the job quicker it didn't change the end result. [/quote] Grämlins would never have been fighting alone in the first place if it had not been for Ramirus. We at MHA (and probably most of the other alliances on our side) at the time would have been happy to tie up the lower ranks of IRON in perpetuity if not for the vile nature of Ramirus's treatment of our government and members. We asked him for a reasonable end game and when he didn't have one he insulted us. He begged us to cut the ties and we did. He wanted to destroy Grämlins more than IRON did I think and he succeeded. Edited August 24, 2011 by masterbake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Bad Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 [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] How about MHA VS ODN and GPA VS SPARTA winners take on each other? MHA could come out on top of that crowd. Maybe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 [quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1314222241' post='2787796'] lol. Please stop pming my nations for tech deals when engaging in your shenanigans. They're so young and innocent... [/quote] You guys are such nice people to do tech deals with though, also with your size no one can really do anything about it regardless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccabal86 Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 [quote name='masterbake' timestamp='1314226668' post='2787819'] Grämlins would never have been fighting alone in the first place if it had not been for Ramirus. We at MHA (and probably most of the other alliances on our side) at the time would have been happy to tie up the lower ranks of IRON in perpetuity if not for the vile nature of Ramirus's treatment of our government and members. We asked him for a reasonable end game and when he didn't have one he insulted us. He begged us to cut the ties and we did. He wanted to destroy Grämlins more than IRON did I think and he succeeded. [/quote] Of course had it not been for Ramirus, GRE would have peaced out like the rest of our opponents after the signing of the ESA, so... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted August 24, 2011 Report Share Posted August 24, 2011 I think this would be better if you took into account both percentages and raw data. Raw data is important, but that just makes the biggest alliances score higher without taking into account efficiency. Percentages are also important, but a micro-AA having 100% of it's members having WRC's are no match for alliances with a reasonable amount of members. I'd suggest ranking them according to each on separate lists, and then averaging those scores to have a third final list. It still wouldn't take into account things like experience and other immeasurable statistics, but it would still be a nice improvement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jesse james Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 [quote name='Neo Uruk' timestamp='1314144641' post='2787258'] Already inaccurate sorry. What in the $%&@? Why are those five alliances above these two? [/quote] Because TSO is awesome and ready when needed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jesse james Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 [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] First off, get off our past. We left over 2.5 years ago, seeing that someone still cares about that is kinda sad. Second, you have no idea on our activity level. besides that the only way to know who is "war-ready" is to have wars. It is kinda sad we have to do threads like this instead of having wars to begin with. We all say this game is slow, well that is because no one has wars. If we had wars like we use to maybe more people would play. It would also be better with more wars because then newer nations wouldnt be so dramatically uneven. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 [quote name='jesse james' timestamp='1314232705' post='2787874'] First off, get off our past. We left over 2.5 years ago, seeing that someone still cares about that is kinda sad. Second, you have no idea on our activity level. besides that the only way to know who is "war-ready" is to have wars. It is kinda sad we have to do threads like this instead of having wars to begin with. We all say this game is slow, well that is because no one has wars. If we had wars like we use to maybe more people would play. It would also be better with more wars because then newer nations wouldnt be so dramatically uneven. [/quote] Nobody is stopping you to declare war, instead of complain go and declare war. Oh wait! Those who complain about the lack of wars are the same who spend months and months trying to isolate someone for only then, declaring a war who is already won even before it starts... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor Noldorin Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 [quote name='D34th' timestamp='1314242819' post='2787964'] Nobody is stopping you to declare war, instead of complain go and declare war. Oh wait! Those who complain about the lack of wars are the same who spend months and months trying to isolate someone for only then, declaring a war who is already won even before it starts... [/quote] TSO are the best at isolating people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor Noldorin Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 [quote name='The Big Bad' timestamp='1314227163' post='2787824'] How about MHA VS ODN and GPA VS SPARTA winners take on each other? MHA could come out on top of that crowd. Maybe. [/quote] I've actually fought 3 out of those 4 alliances and can safely say that ODN is far and above all of them. During the BiPolar conflict they handled themselves very nicely. Sparta seemed to be abit more hit and miss with the quality of their fighters but they weren't bad. I think MHA would put up about as much fight as GPA did during the Woodstock Massacre which is to say, not much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jesse james Posted August 25, 2011 Report Share Posted August 25, 2011 [quote name='D34th' timestamp='1314242819' post='2787964'] Nobody is stopping you to declare war, instead of complain go and declare war. Oh wait! Those who complain about the lack of wars are the same who spend months and months trying to isolate someone for only then, declaring a war who is already won even before it starts... [/quote] If you say so, I guess I should say thanks for thinking TSO has such a big role in these things. Also sometimes people just bring it on themselves. 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.