Rate the War Ability

[Monster]

I see the old purple hate still is going strong.

[Rampage3]

[quote name='Zoomzoomzoom' timestamp='1326555911' post='2899424']
I can only assume that when you say 20+ ghosts you're referencing the fact that those that helped NEW fight FARK returned. If that's true you'll remember that we all jumped back before you or STA even countered us. The moment PC declared on Polaris is when we jumped over. So you knew full well how many people you were attacking, but I guess nobody really knew what you were planning since you told others you'd fight with SF. I'll give you some credit though, we had two ghosts from iFOK (one was ex-PC) come over to help out with fresh stocks of 25 nukes.

After one round most of those "high NS ghosts" were out of range of Rok which ledt even less of PC to declare on you folks. Most of our lower and middle tier were ravaged, but because they coordinated, had military wonders, and were given constant aid they dominated.

I'm not trying to embellish anything here. I'm defending what happened because you had one member disagree with a simple rating of 2 by Arexes.
[/quote]

The ratings mean nothing to me. And I will simply say that the people who fought in that war for Ragnarok (and tracked the movement of many PC nations on and off that AA) would not agree with what you said here. In the end it is water under the bridge for me and I am not even hating on it. It is not how you fight, but if you win. And some of the more...unconventional tactics caught us with our pants down.

Some alliances challenge you to a fight, walk outside, and fight using set rules. NG (and PC before it) will crack a chair over your back from behind as you walk outside and kick you into unconsciousness when you fall. I can respect that, it is simply not how everyone fights in war. There is actually a certain poetry in it and I generally agree with your war assessment. You are certainly the toughest Rok has faced in my time here, and we have faced quite a few. Respect given where due. But it is also true that anyone that knows anything about war saw the matchup for what it was going in. That was my point.

[Trigger]

[size=2][quote name='Micheal Malone' timestamp='1326571755' post='2899605']
As a point of reference... would [b]completely dominated[/b] fit better here?
[/quote]

This is probably the term I personally think fits best... at least from my inside perspective of that war. Obliterated and destroyed seem a little over the top. I think too much is being put into the "PC war strategy" though. After the first couple rounds most of PC upper tier had no more targets in range and out of peace mode. Now that ANS advantage of PC was no longer in effect. The war started with Rok having ~2.5 to 1 nation advatage and 2 to 1 strength advantage. Once our upper tier could no longer declare those numbers were even higher in Roks favor. Add to that the Rok former upper tier now fighting in the trenches with PC middle and lower tier nations at a huge wonder disadvantage. This is where I thought Rok earned its low score because even with all the advantages they couldn't take control and continued to fall. I fought from day 1 until peace achieved and can't remember a single time that any 2 Rok nations I was fighting coordinated attacks... not once. Personally I'm not trying to dog Rok with this, it's just my opinion of how things unfolded and why the rank was so low.[/size]

[Rampage3]

No problem man.

[JoshuaR]

[quote name='Noob Cake' timestamp='1326574120' post='2899633']
[img]http://i.imgur.com/GnG8G.png[/img]  

Cybernations Wars: Press a button and compare stats. Not a real war.
[/quote]
As long as we have to coordinate with NEW, our war effectiveness will no doubt fail to match our potential. Your statistics, they matter not.

[BDRocks]

[quote name='Noob Cake' timestamp='1326574120' post='2899633']
[img]http://i.imgur.com/GnG8G.png[/img]

Cybernations Wars: Press a button and compare stats. Not a real war.
[/quote]

MK has another 111k Tech in GOONS atm. Meaning we are really ranked 10 in tech behind TOP. Still not as great as we should be but much better than 13th.

Edited January 15, 2012 by BDRocks

[Captain Flinders]

[quote name='Noob Cake' timestamp='1326574120' post='2899633']
[img]http://i.imgur.com/GnG8G.png[/img]  

Cybernations Wars: Press a button and compare stats. Not a real war.
[/quote]
Snap. I certainly didn't think we'd break the top 15.

[Valtamdraugr]

[quote name='Artigo' timestamp='1326590672' post='2899802']
Are you upset that your alliance was eviscerated?
[/quote]
Not at all. I had a blast. It was, I think, the last bit of fun I had before this thread turned up.

[quote name='Trigger' timestamp='1326599823' post='2899875']
[size=2]

This is probably the term I personally think fits best... at least from my inside perspective of that war. Obliterated and destroyed seem a little over the top. I think too much is being put into the "PC war strategy" though. After the first couple rounds most of PC upper tier had no more targets in range and out of peace mode. Now that ANS advantage of PC was no longer in effect. The war started with Rok having ~2.5 to 1 nation advatage and 2 to 1 strength advantage. Once our upper tier could no longer declare those numbers were even higher in Roks favor. Add to that the Rok former upper tier now fighting in the trenches with PC middle and lower tier nations at a huge wonder disadvantage. This is where I thought Rok earned its low score because even with all the advantages they couldn't take control and continued to fall. I fought from day 1 until peace achieved and can't remember a single time that any 2 Rok nations I was fighting coordinated attacks... not once. Personally I'm not trying to dog Rok with this, it's just my opinion of how things unfolded and why the rank was so low.[/size]
[/quote]
Zoom, Artigo... this^. Take it for what it was and stop trying so hard.

[chefjoe]

[quote name='Jacapo Saladin' timestamp='1326572523' post='2899613']
Ragnarok: 2
Valhalla: 2
[/quote]
bwahahahaha

I swear to god the amount of butthurt you express with every post literally brings a smile to my face when I see any of your posts......One day you will grow up and put on big boy pants and realize its nice not being a petulant child for all to see

[Bob Ilyani]

ITT people actually give a $%&@ about a bunch of war ability "ratings"

NGers, I think everyone in RoK and otherwise gets it. You beat us in that war, and badly. There hasn't really been much in this thread to dispute that fact, and I personally feel like anyone that tries to is wrong. That being said, if you choose to be ultra-specific in your (opinionated, as is everyones) phrasing with regards to last years war, that is your choice, but keep in mind it is [b]your[/b] phrasing. There are certain things that cannot be argued about the war; that PC beat RoK is one of them, but the scale of that defeat certainly is not.

[Regent of Omerta]

[quote name='EViL0nE' timestamp='1326169551' post='2896698']
I'll just list the people I've fought based on only the wars I fought. I don't care if they're top 40 alliances or not:
IRON (Karma) - 4 (There was random coordination, mediocre-poor WCs)
IRON (BiPolar) - 6 (The people I fought the second time around really took their Karma loss to heart and worked to better themselves)
UPN (VE-NpO) - -2 (can I give a negative?)
GATO (VE-NpO) - 3 (They bled members faster than UPN, but the ones that stuck around fought decently)
NEAT (TOP-NpO) - 2 (Only fought one guy.. he wasn't prepared for war)
Valhalla (TOP-NpO) - 3 (Taking out the 2 nations I fought with acceptable WCs for their size, the combined WCs for the other 6 nations I fought didn't break 100m)
SC (TOP-NpO) - 4 (certainly more motivated to fight than either Val or NEAT)

I have heard from numerous alliance mates that Basketball Ninjas truly brought their A game and were, by far, the most coordinated and well prepared alliance that we fought this war.
[/quote]

ROFL, you're nations wouldn't come out of peace mode. Oh man, thanks for the laugh, I needed that today.

Edited January 15, 2012 by Regent of Omerta

[AlmightyGrub]

If an alliance attacking another allows a significant portion of the defending alliance to enter peace mode it is not a sign of superiority, it is a sign of poor OPSEC. There is zero obligation on a nation who enters peace mode as ordered by his alliance to exit peace mode to provide amusement for anyone esle.

I fight because I like it, if I didn't I could have denied anyone I felt like the pleasure of my company for as long as I felt like it... The concept that someone else needs to be your plaything to prove something is often a view held by a coalition curbstomping someone. It may well not be the view of the alliance being curbstomped, especially one who has been there several time before, on both sides of the curbstomp.

[Regent of Omerta]

[quote name='AlmightyGrub' timestamp='1326677624' post='2900539']
If an alliance attacking another allows a significant portion of the defending alliance to enter peace mode it is not a sign of superiority, it is a sign of poor OPSEC. There is zero obligation on a nation who enters peace mode as ordered by his alliance to exit peace mode to provide amusement for anyone esle.

I fight because I like it, if I didn't I could have denied anyone I felt like the pleasure of my company for as long as I felt like it... The concept that someone else needs to be your plaything to prove something is often a view held by a coalition curbstomping someone. It may well not be the view of the alliance being curbstomped, especially one who has been there several time before, on both sides of the curbstomp.
[/quote]

You assume I was looking to curb stomp someone. You also assume I was out to prove something. I have nothing to prove to anyone in this game, I simply call BS when I see it.

You've been around this game a long time Grub, you know how this works.

[AlmightyGrub]

[quote name='Regent of Omerta' timestamp='1326686147' post='2900647']
You assume I was looking to curb stomp someone. You also assume I was out to prove something. I have nothing to prove to anyone in this game, I simply call BS when I see it.

You've been around this game a long time Grub, you know how this works.
[/quote]
I do indeed know how it works, I just cringe when I see logic working its way around in a circle until it eats itself.

People need to surrender the fantasy that everybody exists for their sole amusement. I exist for mine not yours.

[Buds The Man]

[quote name='Sandwich Controversy' timestamp='1326498939' post='2899113']
You've managed to find the biggest "if" in the world. Congratulations.
[/quote]
IM MK SEE ME ROAR. It was a a !@#$@#$ statement to prove a point never did i say it could or would happen. Way to stroke your epeen a bit hope if made you feel better.

[Seerow]

[quote name='Buds The Man' timestamp='1326730858' post='2900918']
IM MK SEE ME ROAR. It was a a !@#$@#$ statement to prove a point never did i say it could or would happen. Way to stroke your epeen a bit hope if made you feel better.
[/quote]

Somebody's acting pretty defensive.

[Buds The Man]

[quote name='Seerow' timestamp='1326731688' post='2900925']
Somebody's acting pretty defensive.
[/quote]
no not really

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='Sandwich Controversy' timestamp='1326498939' post='2899113']
You've managed to find the biggest "if" in the world. Congratulations.[/quote]

Not really, that would actually be, "what GPA suddenly decided to rain down on someone like napalm?" Short answer is that the target would have its upper tier roasted.

Valhalla has no complaint at the present time against Mushroom Kingdom. Why the hate from MK members? I know it hasn't been a particularly active war for you. Bored? Jealous?

[Zoomzoomzoom]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1326733214' post='2900938']
Not really, that would actually be, "what GPA suddenly decided to rain down on someone like napalm?" Short answer is that the target would have its upper tier roasted.
[/quote]

I think people would have said that about FARK's upper tier too. The stats aren't everything especially when they have had eons to build up large tech piles (which they really haven't) and most of the NS is all infra.

I'm willing to guess a good portion of GPA's upper tier don't even have all the military wonders, activity to coordinate, and a clue on what spy ops are the most effective.

[sammykhalifa]

My daddy's RNG result could whip your daddy's RNG result with one hand tied behind its back!

Edited January 16, 2012 by sammykhalifa

[Regent of Omerta]

[quote name='AlmightyGrub' timestamp='1326690867' post='2900696']
I do indeed know how it works, I just cringe when I see logic working its way around in a circle until it eats itself.

People need to surrender the fantasy that everybody exists for their sole amusement. I exist for mine not yours.
[/quote]

I agree with most of what you have said here in that no one joins the game to become a target. The thing I can't figure out is why you're taking such a defensive and sarcastic tone with me when I wasn't speaking to you in the first place. I merely pointed out that someone who had experienced a beat down was running his mouth knowing he took one and his upper tier didn't do a damn thing to help him. I called it like I saw it. Nobody here can disprove what I am saying regardless of how much they post to the contrary, so let's just leave this as it is and call it a day.

[janax]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1326733214' post='2900938']
Not really, that would actually be, "what GPA suddenly decided to rain down on someone like napalm?" Short answer is that the target would have its upper tier roasted.

Valhalla has no complaint at the present time against Mushroom Kingdom. Why the hate from MK members? I know it hasn't been a particularly active war for you. Bored? Jealous?
[/quote]

I'd put PF against GPA any day. True story.

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='Zoomzoomzoom' timestamp='1326733477' post='2900939']
I think people would have said that about FARK's upper tier too. The stats aren't everything especially when they have had eons to build up large tech piles (which they really haven't) and most of the NS is all infra.

I'm willing to guess a good portion of GPA's upper tier don't even have all the military wonders, activity to coordinate, and a clue on what spy ops are the most effective.
[/quote]

Green Protection Agency 229 nations

102 Anti-Air Defense Networks
72 Fallout Shelter System
103 Foreign Airforce Base
92 Hidden Nuclear Missile Silos
114 Manhattan Projects
116 Pentagons
120 Strategic Defense Initiatives
64 Weapons Research Complexes

Activity could be an issue, an aggressive GPA would of course solve that problem. Survey of upper tier nations revealed a few without CIA or at least didn't have max spies, something that is also correctable. As an alliance, should have enough money to totally blow the first couple of rounds of combat as a learning exercise and still inflict massive damage. Sure you could gang bang them and its been done once before, but as an offensive force, they could prove rather formidable.

Edited January 16, 2012 by ChairmanHal

[Crymson]

[quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1326733214' post='2900938']
Not really, that would actually be, "what GPA suddenly decided to rain down on someone like napalm?" Short answer is that the target would have its upper tier roasted.
[/quote]

No, not really. Big nations aren't everything. The people behind them need to coordinate with each other, know how to fight, and have enough cash on hand to make battle, else they'll be unable to operate at peak capacity.

Take FARK in this war, for example. We had big concerns about their top tier in the months leading up to the war. More, we were somewhat nervous at taking them on without Umbrella. In the event, it was not difficult. We had numerical superiority, yes, but FARK also just didn't fight all that well. Compare this to the fight TOP's upper tier put up in BPW against odds equal or perhaps greater.

Everyone can press the 'nuke' button regularly, but often nations fail to do even this, and, in any event, simply pressing that button won't inflict anywhere near maximum damage.

Etc. etc. In sum, the driver's got to be good at handling the vehicle, else the vehicle can't be utilized to its peak capacity.

Edited January 16, 2012 by Crymson

[ChairmanHal]

[quote name='Crymson' timestamp='1326752466' post='2901109']
No, not really. Big nations aren't everything. The people behind them need to coordinate with each other, know how to fight, and have enough cash on hand to make battle, else they'll be unable to operate at peak capacity. [/quote]

Oh I agree, where I might disagree is how long that it would take sufficiently motivated people getting good advice to learn to do those things. You wouldn't take GPA offensive without advance training. Also, it's not quad attacks, altering attack times, coordinated follow on attacks after a nuke, and other tactics are state secrets. Anyone can do those things and be taught to do those things quickly.

[quote]Take FARK in this war, for example. We had big concerns about their top tier in the months leading up to the war. More, we were somewhat nervous at taking them on without Umbrella. In the event, it was not difficult. We had numerical superiority, yes, but FARK also just didn't fight all that well. Compare this to the fight TOP's upper tier put up in BPW against odds equal or perhaps greater. [/quote]

I would argue that what you hit was a slowly dying tree and the trunk turned out to be somewhat hollow in the middle. Not motivated as a whole, even if you ran into some resistance.

[quote]Everyone can press the 'nuke' button regularly, but often nations fail to do even this, and, in any event, simply pressing that button won't inflict anywhere near maximum damage. [/quote]

I completely agree. The key as I indicated above is to have a properly motivated group of people who agree with the reasons for fighting and actually want to fight. If GPA ever got there, they would be a formidable war machine and a valuable piece of any bloc or coalition. Fark this war should have been a much harder nut to crack. That they weren't confirms what I've been watching for some time.