Rate the War Ability

[IYIyTh]

[quote name='janax' timestamp='1327112073' post='2903979']
It will be impossible to calculate, due to the multiple alliances fighting.

From the stats I have, Sparta took more damage than it inflicted on PF, KDF, Invicta. UE has no stats available. If you attribute ALL losses by Olympus and BAPS to Sparta it finally becomes even. WHich only leaves TIO (12 total wars), TPF (0 wars) and NPO.

Considering that in a "3v1" you should be doing more damage than you take, it's still sad.
[/quote]

+jR

It's possible by aggregate. There are numbers and when I have time I'll do it to amuse myself, to be honest Sparta will have to have performed pretty-friggen terribly as I avidly watched a certain other parties chart.

[Zoomzoomzoom]

[quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1327195312' post='2904422']
+jR

It's possible by aggregate. There are numbers and when I have time I'll do it to amuse myself, to be honest Sparta will have to have performed pretty-friggen terribly as I avidly watched a certain other parties chart.
[/quote]

Who in your opinion performed terribly?

[Monster]

I think Nebula-X.

[Sang Amurwabhumi]

[quote name='Daikos' timestamp='1327182680' post='2904345']
This is why you are bad at war. Being unwilling to coordinate with fellow attackers isn't something to be proud of. It's stupid. On both targets I fought this last war where NEW members were also involved all they managed to do was save the defender from receiving a significant amount of damage.

By refusing to coordinate, refusing to allow the nation that has the best damage output to nuke and refusing to allow the high tech nations to perform spy operations all you were managing to do was prevent the defender from receiving any real damage. Over a wars time when a nation with 2k tech and no WRC is doing the nuking and not coordinating with the other attackers hundreds, if not thousands, of infra / tech / dongs are saved. When your nations are that crappy and you nuke and attack instead of nations with 8k+ tech and WRCs you might as well be fighting on the opponents side.

Stick to raiding single nations. It's all you can handle.
[/quote]
You have a good point there, but you might forget that we can not generalize things simply based on one or two samples.

At least, I never thought that several umbrella's member with less of war ability will reflect Umbrella's war ability as a whole.

we appreciate the reviews tho'

cheers

[IYIyTh]

[quote name='Zoomzoomzoom' timestamp='1327213747' post='2904535']
Who in your opinion performed terribly?
[/quote]


MHA. Fark to a lesser extent.

[Vol Navy]

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1327165389' post='2904217']
No, your assertions are BS and hypocritical simply based on precedent.

TPF's upper tier outside of JBone, Vol Navy, and Bosko really, sat in PM and made !@#$%* propaganda in the interests of post-war preservation in the last war. The alliance that was actually mocked for being pansies ended up sending most of their upper tier into the grinder and then got mocked for doing it in a ham fisted fashion and then they got dropped by the alliance they clung to forever for no real reason. Invicta went all out more or less, dropped as well.

In this war, they peace moded significant portions of their upper tier while making empty threats to WAPA. They hit an overmatched target that everyone knew was overmatched from the start given the consistently low ratings of FAN by people in this thread.

MLP alliance did the same thing.

IRON peace moded their upper tier against Gre in the Ram thing and not all of them came out, and it was the smart move for them.

IRON peace moded their upper tier in this war and then it didn't really have to do anything to do anything because Fark hit NPO. I don't really see it as cowardly.
[/quote]


You are incorrect. In DH/NPO 5 or 6 of our pre-war top 10 nations came and fought. Which was about the only thing even resembling an upper tier we had at the time.

I am actually fairly sure that we've been on the bad side of war more days since Karma started than any other alliance on Bob.

[Monster]

[quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1327229114' post='2904674']
You are incorrect. In DH/NPO 5 or 6 of our pre-war top 10 nations came and fought. Which was about the only thing even resembling an upper tier we had at the time.

I am actually fairly sure that we've been on the bad side of war more days since Karma started than any other alliance on Bob.
[/quote]

Can you name them? That's what I'm curious about. I named three guys. I don't think Zeke ever came out.

I know that some of you fight hard, but the issue is, all of your 50k+ was pmed for the most part. Like when has Deathcat fought in a while? I'm sure he's disappointed about it.

Yes, I understand your struggles, but there was no real need for you to stay at war during Karma, for instance. That was a weird choice. I mean if you had hit VE or RoK to begin with, but I just don't see the logic in staying at war when you only declared on one small alliance and then staying at war with people not fighting NPO. I mean NPO didn't care that NATO left after a week or something.

Compare the state of your alliance to STA for instance or Polar(they never really go without taking damage). One war where everything is wiped out is a lot worse than several where it isn't. I know the TOOL merger(TOOL usually took minimal damage in wars as a peripheral alliance) has masked losses a lot so my statement extends to them. I don't really have much of an issue with TPF outside of the moral indignation over various things and gloating over PM from people like HHAYD. I think mhawk has no clue in terms of politics and he shouldn't really play drama queen. I don't care about the UjW at this point. I mean, honestly, my ass was still going to be on the line to defend you(Fark cancelled Umbrella over it lol) even though OBM and others said we were going to side with RoK/Athens and that we wanted TPF destroyed.

Like I said, I'm not part of some "Roll TPF" movement at this point even though the idea is funny. Where's TCK?

I guess reading about mhawk's idea to sit out every war as if it was a plausible strategy and wait for some imaginary MK/TOP vs PB war gave me a really lasting impression of your alliance. I just can't respect something like that.

The fact that he presented it as an official position apparently when it wasn't really true is another thing.

Edited January 22, 2012 by Roquentin

[JoshuaR]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1327170498' post='2904269']
Lets look at the numbers, and pay close attention to Roquentin's own ranking of FAN.

JoshuaR : 3
[/quote]
I'm so good.

[Captain Flinders]

[quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1327229114' post='2904674']
I am actually fairly sure that we've been on the bad side of war more days since Karma started than any other alliance on Bob.
[/quote]
Goodie for you. And if your alliance's history started with the Karma war, you might have been able to lay claim to some kind of high ground. But it doesn't, and you can't.

Edited January 22, 2012 by Captain Flinders

[White Chocolate]

[quote name='EViL0nE' timestamp='1326169551' post='2896698']SC (TOP-NpO) - 4 (certainly more motivated to fight than either Val or NEAT)[/quote]

To be fair we had a number of small nations who had few to 0 wonders and low tech (because they normally sell tech) fighting GOD nations who had been brought way down but had a full set of military wonders (including MP's which they used) and a large amount tech considering their size. Our small nations did so willingly knowing they were going to get squished into total paste, without complaint and for multiple rounds of war and not one surrendered.

In those cases, yeah - the formerly large nations with more wonders and tech kicked our small guys up one side and down the other if you just look at damage done. However when you consider that it was these small nations who, in spite of being hit with massive damage, kept their opponents (sometimes being the only one) from slipping into peace mode and building up that way and then attacking someone else - well, how does a person assign a number to signify "fighting ability" to dedication like that?

That's SC at our best, and that's powerful.

Edited January 22, 2012 by White Chocolate

[Vol Navy]

[quote name='Captain Flinders' timestamp='1327242654' post='2904734']
Goodie for you. And if your alliance's history started with the Karma war, you might have been able to lay claim to some kind of high ground. But it doesn't, and you can't.
[/quote]


I am not trying to claim any kind of high ground. Just stating the facts. Our alliance has taken massive damage since Karma.

Maybe someday you'll get over your grudge against us, but since it's been nearly 4 years since we fought, I have to doubt it at this point.

[Vol Navy]

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1327229671' post='2904678']
Can you name them? That's what I'm curious about. I named three guys. I don't think Zeke ever came out.

I know that some of you fight hard, but the issue is, all of your 50k+ was pmed for the most part. Like when has Deathcat fought in a while? I'm sure he's disappointed about it.

Yes, I understand your struggles, but there was no real need for you to stay at war during Karma, for instance. That was a weird choice. I mean if you had hit VE or RoK to begin with, but I just don't see the logic in staying at war when you only declared on one small alliance and then staying at war with people not fighting NPO. I mean NPO didn't care that NATO left after a week or something.

Compare the state of your alliance to STA for instance or Polar(they never really go without taking damage). One war where everything is wiped out is a lot worse than several where it isn't. I know the TOOL merger(TOOL usually took minimal damage in wars as a peripheral alliance) has masked losses a lot so my statement extends to them. I don't really have much of an issue with TPF outside of the moral indignation over various things and gloating over PM from people like HHAYD. I think mhawk has no clue in terms of politics and he shouldn't really play drama queen. I don't care about the UjW at this point. I mean, honestly, my ass was still going to be on the line to defend you(Fark cancelled Umbrella over it lol) even though OBM and others said we were going to side with RoK/Athens and that we wanted TPF destroyed.

Like I said, I'm not part of some "Roll TPF" movement at this point even though the idea is funny. Where's TCK?

I guess reading about mhawk's idea to sit out every war as if it was a plausible strategy and wait for some imaginary MK/TOP vs PB war gave me a really lasting impression of your alliance. I just can't respect something like that.

The fact that he presented it as an official position apparently when it wasn't really true is another thing.
[/quote]


TCK has departed the planet, as have some of the others who fought during PB/DH.

Link Gaetz and I fought the same MK/Umb nations in PB/DH and he went to ZI in that war. He was top 5 in TPF pre-war. Desperado was top 10 in TPF and fought that war. He's since departed the planet as well.

Out of all of our nations above 50k NS there are only 4 or 5 who were in TPF during Karma. The rest are mostly nations that have merged in over time since then. Most of our top tier consists of former DOOM and TOOL members.

As for Karma, the people who stayed in TPF didn't care about the shape of our nations at the point Pacifica got peace and were willing to take whatever else anyone wanted to pile on over the Poison Clan issue. It may have been stupid, but at the time Poison Clan had just broken the NAP to attack us. And Mhawk was honestly hoping to mend that fence, which is why we didn't roll them when we had the backing of tC. I had no issue with staying in the war that long even though I went from a top 200 nation down to about 12,000 ns by the end of it. Some things are more important that NS.

During the last war, we ended up with PM stays from some of our top nations much longer originally planned due to foot dragging from a certain purple alliance. But the 50k barrier didn't matter. There wasn't any pressure below 75k in that war. I fought in and out of peace mode from 35-50k the entire war, picking and choosing any target I wanted. I was countered one time during all the rounds I fought, by a GOON.

MK actually took it very hard that war to have been on the winning side. Umbrella sat out of reach, and GOONS only had about 5 nations between 30-50k to take off the pressure. And for whatever reason the various CnG alliances that DoW'd us didn't really do much fighting at all. As it turned out it was the last days for quite a few of them as individual alliances before merging into TLR.

[Captain Flinders]

[quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1327280285' post='2905092']
I am not trying to claim any kind of high ground. Just stating the facts. Our alliance has taken massive damage since Karma.

Maybe someday you'll get over your grudge against us, but since it's been nearly 4 years since we fought, I have to doubt it at this point.
[/quote]
Me disliking you has nothing to do with your war ability, which is what we're talking about. You're claiming that, due to your post Karma war frequency, you have a superior fighting ability. I don't believe that to be the case and I've already stated why.

[Grabem]

[quote name='Captain Flinders' timestamp='1327324972' post='2905459']
Me disliking you has nothing to do with your war ability, which is what we're talking about. You're claiming that, due to your post Karma war frequency, you have a superior fighting ability. I don't believe that to be the case and I've already stated why.
[/quote]
Wait, what? Yes, this topic is about war ability but you're the one who derailed and brought up pre-Karma history and discussions of moral high-ground and now you've turned right around and said they have no place here. Vol was talking about how much fighting TPF has done in response to accusations about hiding in peace not about fighting ability and certainly not about anything that warranted your comment about the past.

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='JoshuaR' timestamp='1327230291' post='2904680']
I'm so good.
[/quote]

You sir, were probably the only 100% honest person in that thread in regards to FAN, and should be commended.

[Monster]

[quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1327281610' post='2905113']


MK actually took it very hard that war to have been on the winning side. Umbrella sat out of reach, and GOONS only had about 5 nations between 30-50k to take off the pressure. And for whatever reason the various CnG alliances that DoW'd us didn't really do much fighting at all. As it turned out it was the last days for quite a few of them as individual alliances before merging into TLR.
[/quote]

The thing is, as you've said a lot of their mid tier had decided to call it quits and didn't fight back effectively. I'm not sure why the C&G alliances didn't. I had been trying to get a real counter on TPF but we were trying to avoid tapping the treaties. Same thing with Molon Labe(which is why criticism from some about VE's course of action is inappropriate.)

[Link Gaetz]

[quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1327281610' post='2905113']
TCK has departed the planet, as have some of the others who fought during PB/DH.

Link Gaetz and I fought the same MK/Umb nations in PB/DH and he went to ZI in that war. He was top 5 in TPF pre-war. Desperado was top 10 in TPF and fought that war. He's since departed the planet as well.

Out of all of our nations above 50k NS there are only 4 or 5 who were in TPF during Karma. The rest are mostly nations that have merged in over time since then. Most of our top tier consists of former DOOM and TOOL members.

As for Karma, the people who stayed in TPF didn't care about the shape of our nations at the point Pacifica got peace and were willing to take whatever else anyone wanted to pile on over the Poison Clan issue. It may have been stupid, but at the time Poison Clan had just broken the NAP to attack us. And Mhawk was honestly hoping to mend that fence, which is why we didn't roll them when we had the backing of tC. I had no issue with staying in the war that long even though I went from a top 200 nation down to about 12,000 ns by the end of it. Some things are more important that NS.

During the last war, we ended up with PM stays from some of our top nations much longer originally planned due to foot dragging from a certain purple alliance. But the 50k barrier didn't matter. There wasn't any pressure below 75k in that war. I fought in and out of peace mode from 35-50k the entire war, picking and choosing any target I wanted. I was countered one time during all the rounds I fought, by a GOON.

MK actually took it very hard that war to have been on the winning side. Umbrella sat out of reach, and GOONS only had about 5 nations between 30-50k to take off the pressure. And for whatever reason the various CnG alliances that DoW'd us didn't really do much fighting at all. As it turned out it was the last days for quite a few of them as individual alliances before merging into TLR.
[/quote]
That's correct. I came out and fought five MKers and Umbrella nations. Quickest trip to ZI I've made. Held my own for a couple days before sheer numbers were too much.

[Captain Flinders]

[quote name='Grabem' timestamp='1327371589' post='2905914']
Wait, what? Yes, this topic is about war ability but you're the one who derailed and brought up pre-Karma history and discussions of moral high-ground and now you've turned right around and said they have no place here. Vol was talking about how much fighting TPF has done in response to accusations about hiding in peace not about fighting ability and certainly not about anything that warranted your comment about the past.
[/quote]
I didn't say anything about moral high ground. I didn't say anything about morals at all. I have clearly stated that the amount of fighting an alliance has done is not proportional to their ability. The two do not necessarily grow together. The only time I brought up pre-Karma at all was when I was referring to my personal experience with prolonged war. My first comment on TPF in this thread was that being stubborn is also not indicative of fighting ability. I believe I've given a pretty fair and reasonable assessment of TPF's ability. You guys just aren't taking criticism very well and think that because our people have had conflict in the past that everything I say must be rooted in an emotional response.

Careful, your bias is showing.

Edited January 25, 2012 by Captain Flinders

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1327436252' post='2906231']
The thing is, as you've said a lot of their mid tier had decided to call it quits and didn't fight back effectively. I'm not sure why the C&G alliances didn't. I had been trying to get a real counter on TPF but we were trying to avoid tapping the treaties. Same thing with Molon Labe(which is why criticism from some about VE's course of action is inappropriate.)
[/quote]

Because no C&G alliances, to my recollection, declared on TPF. We declared on Legion. That might explain alot of why people didnt think we "did much." I also dont recall ever being asked to hit TPF.

[Vol Navy]

[quote name='Rush Sykes' timestamp='1327517449' post='2906680']
Because no C&G alliances, to my recollection, declared on TPF. We declared on Legion. That might explain alot of why people didnt think we "did much." I also dont recall ever being asked to hit TPF.
[/quote]


Whether there was an official DOW or not I can't remember. But we fought at least Athens and LOST during the war.

[Vol Navy]

There was a DOW.

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=98685&st=0

[Grabem]

[quote name='Captain Flinders' timestamp='1327512776' post='2906641']
I didn't say anything about moral high ground. I didn't say anything about morals at all. I have clearly stated that the amount of fighting an alliance has done is not proportional to their ability. The two do not necessarily grow together. The only time I brought up pre-Karma at all was when I was referring to my personal experience with prolonged war. My first comment on TPF in this thread was that being stubborn is also not indicative of fighting ability. I believe I've given a pretty fair and reasonable assessment of TPF's ability. You guys just aren't taking criticism very well and think that because our people have had conflict in the past that everything I say must be rooted in an emotional response.

Careful, your bis is showing.
[/quote]

Sorry if my response is not reflecting of the whole thread which I admittedly have not read in it's entirety. I am not questioning the idea that fighting constantly = war ability otherwise I would be questioning more people than just you. My post was in response to complete confusion over what were at the time your three most recent posts.

Roquentin was talking about TPF keeping upper tier in peace, not fighting fully, etc. Vol said that we'd been on the curb end of the war less than the stomp end since Karma to refute that point that we didn't fight. You then replied saying "if your alliance's history started with the Karma war, you might have been able to lay claim to some kind of high ground." To me that sounded like you were bringing history in reference to morality not fighting ability or even simple fighting period. That is far beyond the scope of the argument but then you're the one who comes in saying that such discussion is beyond the scope even though you were the one that brought it up. That's what my confusion was over not your assessment of my alliance's fighting ability. It seemed to make no sense to reference something and then call yourself out on it being irrelevant.

[Rush Sykes]

[quote name='Vol Navy' timestamp='1327520094' post='2906742']
There was a DOW.

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=98685&st=0
[/quote]

Oddly enough, I do remember that now. I remember as the months of the last war dragged on, I admittedly cared less and less about prosecuting it. For Gods sake 3 months of constant war wears on you. Now I remember why I hate wars.

[Daeryon]

I thought about participating in this thread, but have decided against it.

Edited January 27, 2012 by Daeryon

[IYIyTh]

[quote name='Daeryon' timestamp='1327625341' post='2907751']
I thought about participating in this thread, but have decided against it.
[/quote]

Why not? Very few people are being anywhere near objective, so even if your opinion is completely back-assward it could potentially be multiple times more enlightening than some of the others floating around.