Lukapaka Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 93 Legion Nations in war mode and still not in anarchy?! What's going on here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wabooz Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 [quote name='Lukapaka' timestamp='1318179816' post='2821552'] 93 Legion Nations in war mode and still not in anarchy?! What's going on here? [/quote] rhetorical question? otherwise: no nukes, no anarchy. Unless a nation is neglected and doesn't have their guerrilla camps, troops etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabcat Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 [quote name='Rayvon' timestamp='1318164052' post='2821444'] And where would this 'world' (aka 'game') be with no villains? No hatred? No asshats? It'd be a drab, boring world interesting only to those who enjoy nation building like the neutrals -- but then, what's the point of the game? To be the biggest? Whoop! Please? Can we? Let the hate flow through you, cast the chains bound to you by moralism and societies forced ideas of what is right and what is wrong. Think for yourself. [size="1"]heh - casing edit[/size] [/quote] Absolutely. The only thing I've built in the 431 days I've been here that I like to see getting bigger is my casualty count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flonker Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 [quote name='Wabooz' timestamp='1318190217' post='2821649'] rhetorical question? otherwise: no nukes, no anarchy. Unless a nation is neglected and doesn't have their guerrilla camps, troops etc [/quote] Or they're just that good? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wabooz Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 [quote name='Flonker' timestamp='1318190918' post='2821656'] Or they're just that good? [/quote] Perhaps, as it isn't that difficult when you have camps. Just have to keep obtaining new troops/tanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Bad Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 [quote name='Flonker' timestamp='1318190918' post='2821656'] Or they're just that good? [/quote] I do not think that is the case, its more of most of the people you are fighting are just that bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoFish Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 [quote name='Wabooz' timestamp='1318190217' post='2821649'] rhetorical question? otherwise: no nukes, no anarchy. Unless a nation is neglected and doesn't have their guerrilla camps, troops etc [/quote] You actually believe this, don't you? No wonder your side needs an NS advantage against the Legion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wabooz Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 [quote name='NoFish' timestamp='1318191339' post='2821660'] You actually believe this, don't you? No wonder your side needs an NS advantage against the Legion. [/quote] So you think you could anarchy me without using nukes? I highly doubt it. Nothing to do with "skill" but how things work. It's rather easy to get more troops before you lose the amount needed to cause anarchy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 [quote name='Wabooz' timestamp='1318191605' post='2821664'] So you think you could anarchy me without using nukes? I highly doubt it. Nothing to do with "skill" but how things work. It's rather easy to get more troops before you lose the amount needed to cause anarchy. [/quote] So...there are no anarchies outside of nuclear warfare. NSO, folks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wabooz Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 [quote name='Locke' timestamp='1318193145' post='2821686'] So...there are no anarchies outside of nuclear warfare. NSO, folks! [/quote] Reread my original statement. If you don't neglect your nation I don't see you how get sent into anarchy. Quite a few TE rounds for me and it seemed impossible for my nation to get into anarchy once I had GCs, even while fighting 5-6 other people. Like I said, repurchase troops 1-3 times a day and you're good. But hey, maybe I'm wrong and you're just so good that you could anarchy me without getting the jump and using nukes. Like I told the other guy, I highly doubt it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 [quote name='Locke' timestamp='1318193145' post='2821686'] So...there are no anarchies outside of nuclear warfare. NSO, folks! [/quote] If you're going to try and misrepresent what people say, do a better job of it. It's quite easy to understand that he's saying that any nation who's properly built up (guerrilla camps and barracks in particular) is very hard to anarchy, assuming they're active enough to log in often enough to rebuy. And that's completely true. Outside of nukes, a quad blitz by two nations is really the only surefire way of putting someone into anarchy if they've built up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 [quote name='Varianz' timestamp='1318193941' post='2821696'] If you're going to try and misrepresent what people say, do a better job of it. It's quite easy to understand that he's saying that any nation who's properly built up (guerrilla camps and barracks in particular) is very hard to anarchy, assuming they're active enough to log in often enough to rebuy. And that's completely true. Outside of nukes, a [b]quad blitz by two nations[/b] is really the only surefire way of putting someone into anarchy if they've built up. [/quote] Ok we get it, it's extremly hard to anarchy people without nukes, except for that one tactic that just about every alliance uses with every DoW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wabooz Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 [quote name='berbers' timestamp='1318194083' post='2821698'] Ok we get it, it's extremly hard to anarchy people without nukes, except for that one tactic that just about every alliance uses with every DoW. [/quote] Again, a misrepresentation. Legion is the one who blitzed, not the other way around. We were discussing why so many Legion nations aren't in anarchy, or trying to. However, people will attack and argue over any damned thing on here. It's so beautiful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 [quote name='berbers' timestamp='1318194083' post='2821698'] Ok we get it, it's extremly hard to anarchy people without nukes, except for that one tactic that just about every alliance uses with every DoW. [/quote] Oh look, another idiot. Guess how many days it's been since our DoW? Go back and look at the stats for the number of Legion nations we sent into anarchy with our blitz. It was around a third of them, which, by the way, is hilarious because Legion should have warned all its nations to build up in expectation for a counterattack. Part of the reason we went in so fast is to take advantage of their lack of preparedness. Now that 6 days have gone by, however, all the Legion nations have come out of anarchy from that initial blitz, and they've finally realized they should probably build up. If you need remedial lessons in why built up nations are harder to anarchy, we do have a training program available. Usually it's just for new nations, but we can make an exception in your case, since you clearly need reminders on how long anarchy effects last and why buildups are important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabcat Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 I'm agreeing with Sith's twice on the same thread. I'm going for a lie down. NURSE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vol Navy Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 I have never been anarchied in conventional warfare in my entire time here. If you stay in Defcon 1, have GC and Barracks and a reasonable number of troops when the war gongs go off you won't get anarchied, even by a quad. Especially so if you are active at update. In Karma I was hit by two large PC nations and an MK nation immediately after update. No conventional anarchy. Last war I was hit by two huge Mushrooms, one Umbrella and I was fighting two MKers when they hit. No conventional anarchy in 1 vs 5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Sabcat' timestamp='1318194579' post='2821706'] I'm agreeing with Sith's twice on the same thread. I'm going for a lie down. NURSE! [/quote] Oh hey Sabcat showed up. Here's a perfect example of my anarchy explanation. I'm fighting Sabcat and 3 other Legion nations, 2 of whom are active. Friday night I made sure I had max soldiers and tanks etc (obviously I'd already improvement swapped and all) knowing I wouldn't be on for that update. When I finally managed to log on like 16 hours later, I'd lost something like 8 straight ground battles, with a few wins mixed in, but still wasn't in anarchy. Why? Because of my full buildup. Edit: Basically, some of you need to stop spouting the party line based on your alliances position in the treaty web when confronted with the basic mechanics of CN. Edited October 9, 2011 by Varianz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabcat Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 It's true. Coordinated attacks aren't about anarchy. It's about letting a less strong alliance mate having a chance at winning GA's by weakening the enemy's defences. Sticking with the Varianz example what difference would it make if he was put into anarchy? If he's got a WC and doesn't need to collect it would just be a pretty red A on screen. He could still fight just the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 [quote name='Sabcat' timestamp='1318195214' post='2821714'] It's true. Coordinated attacks aren't about anarchy. It's about letting a less strong alliance mate having a chance at winning GA's by weakening the enemy's defences. Sticking with the Varianz example what difference would it make if he was put into anarchy? If he's got a WC and doesn't need to collect it would just be a pretty red A on screen. He could still fight just the same. [/quote] Well I also couldn't declare new offensive wars, but since my offensive slots are full anyways, that's not a big deal for the moment. And you'd know what my WC was if your spies could get past mine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabcat Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 [quote name='Varianz' timestamp='1318195288' post='2821715'] Well I also couldn't declare new offensive wars, but since my offensive slots are full anyways, that's not a big deal for the moment. And you'd know what my WC was if your spies could get past mine [/quote] I'm working on the assumption that whatever problems you have in the war running out of money isn't going to be one of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vol Navy Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 The only real reason to get in a good blitz and hopefully get an anarchy initially is to keep that nation from declaring ore offensive wars. When you can nuke 3 extra nations during a cycle you really can tack on major damage to an alliance that you wouldn't be able to if you got anarchied by the blitz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 [quote name='Varianz' timestamp='1318194346' post='2821702'] Oh look, another idiot. Guess how many days it's been since our DoW? Go back and look at the stats for the number of Legion nations we sent into anarchy with our blitz. It was around a third of them, which, by the way, is hilarious because Legion should have warned all its nations to build up in expectation for a counterattack. Part of the reason we went in so fast is to take advantage of their lack of preparedness. Now that 6 days have gone by, however, all the Legion nations have come out of anarchy from that initial blitz, and they've finally realized they should probably build up. If you need remedial lessons in why built up nations are harder to anarchy, we do have a training program available. Usually it's just for new nations, but we can make an exception in your case, since you clearly need reminders on how long anarchy effects last and why buildups are important. [/quote] Fair enough, I didn't read every post so didn't get the context of Wabooz's statements, you have to admit taking these out of context would lead you to my conclusion: [quote name='Wabooz' timestamp='1318191605' post='2821664'] So you think you could anarchy me without using nukes? I highly doubt it. Nothing to do with "skill" but how things work. It's rather easy to get more troops before you lose the amount needed to cause anarchy. [/quote] [quote name='Wabooz' timestamp='1318190217' post='2821649'] rhetorical question? otherwise: no nukes, no anarchy. Unless a nation is neglected and doesn't have their guerrilla camps, troops etc [/quote] But yes, once the war is started and people are active around update, the whole anarchy without nukes thing does become difficult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickedj Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 [quote name='Kalasin' timestamp='1318162430' post='2821431'] NPO has not changed its view on alliances like Legion. [/quote] Since when does Letum equal all of NPO? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varianz Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 [quote name='Sabcat' timestamp='1318195442' post='2821716'] I'm working on the assumption that whatever problems you have in the war running out of money isn't going to be one of them. [/quote] Judging from the amount I'm destroying in ops against you, you won't have that problem either. Your partners on the other hand...Cornelius the Noble only has $25mil left from his $75mil starting point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabcat Posted October 9, 2011 Report Share Posted October 9, 2011 WC's are shaky all over the shop. It'll be interesting to see how many nations on both sides have ignored the need to build a WC. The two other Sith I'm fighting are in no shape. Mioria has $28mil and 3.7k infra. The other I'd peace out if he ever logged on he's got 3.5k infra and about $1.3mil 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.