Jarhead Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 Good luck TPC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bionic redhead Posted September 20, 2011 Report Share Posted September 20, 2011 [img]http://i56.tinypic.com/hsuakj.png[/img] Kill 3x more enemy troops, lose battle. Battle system Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bibliophile Posted September 20, 2011 Report Share Posted September 20, 2011 [quote name='Bionic redhead' timestamp='1316477551' post='2804110'] [img]http://i56.tinypic.com/hsuakj.png[/img] Kill 3x more enemy troops, lose battle. Battle system [/quote] I agree, it's a weird result when you did kill more troops and soldiers. Perhaps it has something to do with the relative losses as a percentage of total military? Still, you did get some land and tech and destroy infra despite leaving some cash behind. I'm not sure that qualifies as a defeat despite what the message says. Props to you BR! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevieG Posted September 20, 2011 Report Share Posted September 20, 2011 [quote name='bibliophile' timestamp='1316499753' post='2804372'] I agree, it's a weird result when you did kill more troops and soldiers. Perhaps it has something to do with the relative losses as a percentage of total military? Still, you did get some land and tech and destroy infra despite leaving some cash behind. I'm not sure that qualifies as a defeat despite what the message says. Props to you BR! [/quote] I guess the quantifying factor for a defeat/loss is who gets looted(cash). That being said, what were your battle odds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bionic redhead Posted September 20, 2011 Report Share Posted September 20, 2011 5% But that's irrelevant. The point is I fail to see how killing 3x more enemy soldiers can be anything but a victory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayzie Posted September 20, 2011 Report Share Posted September 20, 2011 It's a half attack, you drop cash but do half damage. Just ignore the Battle Outcome and be happy you did some damage at ridiculously low odds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stelios Posted September 20, 2011 Report Share Posted September 20, 2011 [quote name='Mayzie' timestamp='1316526413' post='2804487'] It's a half attack, you drop cash but do half damage. Just ignore the Battle Outcome and be happy you did some damage at ridiculously low odds. [/quote] What he said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King James XVIII Posted September 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 Update--we've all agreed to peace. Those that want peace now can peace but won't be allowed to attack again. Those that want to keep it going to update can, but there will be no new attacks after update. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cellardoor Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 So if I've been reading the stats pages right, TPC had precisely one nation anarchied in this war. Interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King James XVIII Posted September 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 [quote name='Cellardoor' timestamp='1316564768' post='2804899'] TPC had precisely one nation anarchied in this war. [/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcortell Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 [quote name='King James XVIII' timestamp='1316568484' post='2804953'] [/quote] Let's be honest here. In recent rounds, TPC has had some of the worst DoW's for a quality AA. Yes, you may have decent end of the round wars, but everything before that when you DoW is pretty terrible. "Fluff" in bold.. TPC vs [b]FARK/[/b]Catharsis/[b]RD[/b]: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=103940 TPC vs GR/[b]DF[/b]: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=102119 TPC and The Citadel vs OP: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=101352 (A down declare while OP was dealing with rogues..) If you guys aren't the biggest opportunists/infra huggers for war, I don't know who is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nishiyoshi Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 This was entertaining to say the least. I guess it's time for me to get around to posting a DoE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bionic redhead Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 [quote name='Mayzie' timestamp='1316526413' post='2804487'] It's a half attack, you drop cash but do half damage. Just ignore the Battle Outcome and be happy you did some damage at ridiculously low odds. [/quote] Bucko, you should understand this better than most. As an Englishman I'm contractually obliged to be grumpy at everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomasj_tx Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 (edited) Interesting "War".... [b]TPC[/b] Pre War 35 Total Nations 169,979 Total Strength 4,857 ANS 1 Nuke Post war 36 Total Nations 190,414 Total Strength [b]5,289 ANS 47 Nukes[/b] [b]Black/tW/DF[/b] Pre War 67 Nations 243,774 Total Strength 3,638 ANS 8 Nukes (2 Nations) Post War 66 Nations 153,720 Total Strength 2,329 ANS 1 Nukes At the start of the war, TPC had 3 nations over 7k NS. Now they have 14. And 12 nations in the top 5%. TPC gained 20,400 NS and Black/tW/DF lost 90,054. 11 of TPC's top 15 nations have less than 3,000 defending casualites. 4 of them have zero. Nice Nuke built too, TPC. Edited September 21, 2011 by Thomasj_tx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KillerCruiser Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 [quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1316619129' post='2805306'] Interesting "War".... [b]TPC[/b] Pre War 35 Total Nations 169,979 Total Strength 4,857 ANS 1 Nuke Post war 36 Total Nations 190,414 Total Strength [b]5,289 ANS 47 Nukes[/b] [b]Black/tW/DF[/b] Pre War 67 Nations 243,774 Total Strength 3,638 ANS 8 Nukes (2 Nations) Post War 66 Nations 153,720 Total Strength 2,329 ANS 1 Nukes At the start of the war, TPC had 3 nations over 7k NS. Now they have 14. And 12 nations in the top 5%. TPC gained 20,400 NS and Black/tW/DF lost 90,054. 11 of TPC's top 15 nations have less than 3,000 defending casualites. 4 of them have zero. Nice Nuke built too, TPC. [/quote] So it looks like by your standers Thomas that this could possible be an Up-declare on TPC part. Since since TPC only gained 20K from this war, and the war you fought in your side gained around 60K... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ADude Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 [quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1316619129' post='2805306'] Interesting "War".... [b]TPC[/b] Pre War 35 Total Nations 169,979 Total Strength 4,857 ANS 1 Nuke Post war 36 Total Nations 190,414 Total Strength [b]5,289 ANS 47 Nukes[/b] [b]Black/tW/DF[/b] Pre War 67 Nations 243,774 Total Strength 3,638 ANS 8 Nukes (2 Nations) Post War 66 Nations 153,720 Total Strength 2,329 ANS 1 Nukes At the start of the war, TPC had 3 nations over 7k NS. Now they have 14. And 12 nations in the top 5%. TPC gained 20,400 NS and Black/tW/DF lost 90,054. 11 of TPC's top 15 nations have less than 3,000 defending casualites. 4 of them have zero. Nice Nuke built too, TPC. [/quote] Yep, here is saying ANS doesn't win wars right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomasj_tx Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 (edited) [quote name='KillerCruiser' timestamp='1316622340' post='2805336'] So it looks like by your standers Thomas that this could possible be an Up-declare on TPC part. Since since TPC only gained 20K from this war, [b]and the war you fought in your side gained around 60K[/b]... [/quote] I have no idea where you came up with the notion that OP gained 60k NS during our war. We are 5 days out of war and a number of us just came out of nuke anarchy recently and with rebuilding, we just now about 60k higher than at the start of the war. Edited September 21, 2011 by Thomasj_tx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cellardoor Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 Everyone has their own opinions, but IMO, ANS and nukes reign supreme as far as stats go. It generally lays out like that as far as I can tell. Didn't realize how egregious the ANS difference was. To TPC's credit it looks like they didn't launch many nukes if any. To their discredit, a "top" alliance by most's standards engaging in a non-nuclear war isn't looked upon well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KillerCruiser Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 [quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1316625350' post='2805352'] I have no idea where you came up with the notion that OP gained 60k NS during our war. We are 5 days out of war and a number of us just came out of nuke anarchy recently and with rebuilding, we just now about 60k higher than at the start of the war. [/quote] if you noticed I said your side... I didn't say just OP. If you add up both OP and LE together they gained 60K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King James XVIII Posted September 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 Before I crawl back into my hole, squeeze my precious infra, and prepare to choose targets for our next war the way I usually do--by setting up a dartboard of the smallest alliances out there and picking them blindfolded, then hitting them soon after someone has softened them up... [quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1316619129' post='2805306'] Interesting "War".... At the start of the war, TPC had 3 nations over 7k NS. Now they have 14. And 12 nations in the top 5%. TPC gained 20,400 NS and Black/tW/DF lost 90,054. Nice Nuke built too, TPC. [/quote] I figure the build and increase in nuke count increased our ANS. [quote name='ADude' timestamp='1316622838' post='2805338'] Yep, here is saying ANS doesn't win wars right? [/quote] Indeed it does and so do [b]warchests[/b]. [quote name='Cellardoor' timestamp='1316625749' post='2805355'] Everyone has their own opinions, but IMO, ANS and nukes reign supreme as far as stats go. It generally lays out like that as far as I can tell. Didn't realize how egregious the ANS difference was. To TPC's credit it looks like they didn't launch many nukes if any. To their discredit, a "top" alliance by most's standards engaging in a non-nuclear war isn't looked upon well. [/quote] Very true, ANS and nukes are probably the two statistics that can stand alone when judging the quality of a war. Everyone (should) know however that there must be a number of other things taken into account when making a call. We had 1 nuke at the start of this war. When we jumped we had the ability to buy more and we did. They didn't and we weren't going to use unnecessary force, especially once we saw what conditions were when boots were on the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lehran Posted September 22, 2011 Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 (edited) [quote name='King James XVIII' timestamp='1316672252' post='2805787'] We had 1 nuke at the start of this war. When we jumped we had the ability to buy more and we did. They didn't and we weren't going to use unnecessary force, especially once we saw what conditions were when boots were on the ground. [/quote] The statistics that you posted at the beginning were not actually up to date - it was hours before update, prior to when you guys built up for war (which includes nuke buying). I don't have the exact numbers, but TPC had a fair amount more nukes than her opponents, especially after a lot of her adversaries were hit hard and fell below the 5% mark. Not trying to start anything, just giving my analysis Edited September 22, 2011 by NeoGandalf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomasj_tx Posted September 23, 2011 Report Share Posted September 23, 2011 Given this.... [quote]11 of TPC's top 15 nations have less than 3,000 defending casualites. 4 of them have zero.[/quote] It certainly an "interesting war". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King James XVIII Posted September 23, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 23, 2011 [quote name='NeoGandalf' timestamp='1316735673' post='2806292'] The statistics that you posted at the beginning were not actually up to date - it was hours before update, prior to when you guys built up for war (which includes nuke buying). I don't have the exact numbers, but TPC had a fair amount more nukes than her opponents, especially after a lot of her adversaries were hit hard and fell below the 5% mark. Not trying to start anything, just giving my analysis [/quote] I wish we could get real time stats, that would be a nice change to the game. They were as up to date as I could get them and yes those reflect our strength before the war. We ended up accumulating nukes during the war of course and since they did not have the capability to buy/use we didn't use what we had. [quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1316741211' post='2806374'] Given this.... It certainly an "interesting war". [/quote] "Interesting" indeed. Anyway, I wish all of my [i]intended[/i] and real opponents the best of luck moving forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts