Rate the War Ability

[Aeternos Astramora]

If GPA was really active, had lots of motivation, knew how to fight, had large warchests, and had lots of tech, then they would be difficult.

So basically, if GPA wasn't at all like GPA...

[Monster]

The issue is a function of motivation/interest. Not all of TOP's people coordinated but they were good on an individual level, which enabled them to cause more damage.

Edited January 17, 2012 by Roquentin

[Canik]

Green Protection Agency - 5
World Task Force - 4
Independent Republic Of Orange Nations - 9
Umbrella - 10
Orange Defense Network - 8
New Pacific Order - 8
Mostly Harmless Alliance - 4
Non Grata - 8
Sparta - 4
Global Alliance And Treaty Organization - 6
Viridian Entente - 7
The Order Of The Paradox - 10
Mushroom Kingdom - 7
The Last Remnants - 7
New Polar Order - 8
Nordreich - 9
The Democratic Order - 2
The Legion - 7
FOK - 8
RnR - 7
The Phoenix Federation - 8
Fark - 6
NATO - 7
Nusantara Elite Warriors - 9
The Templar Knights - 6
Ragnarok - 6
Valhalla - 8
Goon Order Of Oppression Negligence And Sadism - 9
Deinos - 5
Legacy - 6
Argent - 7
Multicolored Cross-X Alliance - 3
The Foreign Division - 7
Green Old Party - 5
The Grand Lodge Of Freemasons - 6
LoSS - 7
Fellowship Of Elite Allied Republics - 7 (was 8 before I left)
The International - 7
The Imperial Order - 6
Coalition Of Royal Allied Powers - 5

[Vukland]

I am amused that just because The World Task Force doesn't fight you people think we can't.

[Bob Ilyani]

[quote name='Vukland' timestamp='1326800459' post='2901447']
I am amused that just because The World Task Force doesn't fight you people think we can't.
[/quote]
Yes, once we look at the incredible military record of WTF this all becomes [i]very[/i] clear to us.

[Captain Flinders]

[quote name='Vukland' timestamp='1326800459' post='2901447']
I am amused that just because The World Task Force doesn't fight you people think we can't.
[/quote]
If you do not allow your nations to wage war, your war ability is zero. That's just the way it works.

[Scorponok]

Pretty much what Captain Flinders said. Your war ability can only be judged when you actually fight.

[Canik]

Yep, my ratings are pretty accurate. Sorry WTF. Maybe you should actually force some tasks upon the world.

[Vukland]

[quote name='Captain Flinders' timestamp='1326811401' post='2901516']
If you do not allow your nations to wage war, your war ability is zero. That's just the way it works.
[/quote]

That's flawed thinking ability and history are to different things. We have no history of war as a whole to judge that's true. But we have a lot veterans in our AA. We are in the top ten of everything tech, nukes, infra, ect.. So my point being ability is there we just choose not to get involved.

[Beefspari]

[quote name='Vukland' timestamp='1326867711' post='2902035']
That's flawed thinking ability and history are to different things. We have no history of war as a whole to judge that's true. But we have a lot veterans in our AA. We are in the top ten of everything tech, nukes, infra, ect.. So my point being ability is there we just choose not to get involved.
[/quote]
It's easy to have the highest stats when they never get used.
[img]http://meru.xfury.net/images/aeris/aerisdisL6.jpg[/img]

[Vukland]

[quote name='Beefspari' timestamp='1326868696' post='2902039']
It's easy to have the highest stats when they never get used.
[img]http://meru.xfury.net/images/aeris/aerisdisL6.jpg[/img]
[/quote]

But that's not what we are talking about. We are talking about ability
[quote][color=#222222][font=arial, sans-serif][size=2]
[b][i]a·bil·i·ty[/i]/əˈbilitē/[/b]
[color=#222222]Noun:[list][*]The capacity to do something.[/list][/color][/size][/font][/color]
[/quote]

We have the capacity just no desire.

[JoshuaR]

[quote name='Vukland' timestamp='1326867711' post='2902035']
That's flawed thinking ability and history are to different things. We have no history of war as a whole to judge that's true. But we have a lot veterans in our AA. We are in the top ten of everything tech, nukes, infra, ect.. So my point being ability is there we just choose not to get involved.
[/quote]
The problem is that if anyone ever brings war to you (so that you do not have the choice to not be involved as a whole) because your members don't wish to wage war, they will be sure not to be involved on an individual level. When that happens, your alliance crumbles, with only a few random members sending off nukes without coordination because they're mad they were attacked and they want to make the enemy pay.

You Have to have the potential to choose to go to war to actually have the potential to survive a war. Without that, you are only able to protect your members from individual raiders and rogues, and you will not survive a real war.

[Beefspari]

[quote name='Vukland' timestamp='1326868920' post='2902040']
But that's not what we are talking about. We are talking about ability

We have the capacity just no desire.
[/quote]
Just because you have a gun doesn't mean you know how to use it. You'll put your eye out, kid.
[img]http://meru.xfury.net/images/aeris/aeris-_-L3.jpg[/img]

[chefjoe]

[quote name='Vukland' timestamp='1326868920' post='2902040']
But that's not what we are talking about. [b]We are talking about ability [/b]

We have the capacity [b]just no desire[/b].
[/quote]

You just killed your entire argument, to fight one needs heart, to have heart one needs passion, to have passion one needs desire of which you have admitted to having none of...

IE:You can be the best 'prepared' or 'stocked' or whatever the hell you want to call it but without any desire or drive you arent any better then a fire hydrant that sits around at the ready to fight fires slowly rusting from disuse as all the dogs pass and piss on you.

Edited January 18, 2012 by chefjoe

[Captain Flinders]

[quote name='Vukland' timestamp='1326868920' post='2902040']
We have the capacity just no desire.
[/quote]
Sure, and that makes your war ability null. Nations in WTF want to be neutral. They don't want to fight. Regardless of whether they may have stockpiles of tech or not, they are a member of WTF (or GPA or whatever) because they do not want to fight. Were WTF to be mass declared upon tomorrow, you can bet your ass a ton of surrenders would pop up real quick because these are nations with no desire to fight. I'm sure a few would put up a decent fight, but it would be like a trained military force storming a hippie commune. No matter how big the hippies are, they're not going to stand against those who have been fighting for years while they chilled out in neutrality.

[Scorponok]

[quote name='JoshuaR' timestamp='1326870033' post='2902046']
The problem is that if anyone ever brings war to you (so that you do not have the choice to not be involved as a whole) because your members don't wish to wage war, they will be sure not to be involved on an individual level. When that happens, your alliance crumbles, with only a few random members sending off nukes without coordination because they're mad they were attacked and they want to make the enemy pay.

You Have to have the potential to choose to go to war to actually have the potential to survive a war. Without that, you are only able to protect your members from individual raiders and rogues, and you will not survive a real war.
[/quote]

Just like what happened with FARK.

CN ability is in terms of getting involved. If you don't have the desire to ever get involved then, you lack the ability to be considered.

Plus having a bucket load of veterans, doesn't mean anything if they are all inactive and haven't fought in a long time.

But hey this is just my opinion/ interpretation of war ability.

[Zoomzoomzoom]

If his definition of veteran involves those that desert other alliances during wars, then yes, WTF has quite a few veterans.

By this logic, TDO is an even greater military threat.

[Sang Amurwabhumi]

[quote name='Vukland' timestamp='1326868920' post='2902040']
But that's not what we are talking about. We are talking about ability


We have the capacity just no desire.
[/quote]
What the use of your capacity when you don't have the desire? Are you going to war because of your capacity? LOL

Stats might show you capacity, but is it shows you about your war abilities ?

Even casualties rangking won't show you about it

[Sarmatian Empire]

[quote name='chefjoe' timestamp='1326876796' post='2902066']
You just killed your entire argument, to fight one needs heart, to have heart one needs passion, to have passion one needs desire of which you have admitted to having none of...
[/quote]

This isnt RL, you need a mouse, free time, and an understanding of the war system.

I dont doubt WTF's nations war ability on their individual ability, I dont know who plays TE and what alliances they were in beforehand, but in a coordination sense it would be a major problem I'm sure. Unless they have done this on TE or something

[Canik]

[quote name='Sarmatian Empire' timestamp='1326901982' post='2902144']
This isnt RL, you need a mouse, free time, and an understanding of the war system.

I dont doubt WTF's nations war ability on their individual ability, I dont know who plays TE and what alliances they were in beforehand, but in a coordination sense it would be a major problem I'm sure. Unless they have done this on TE or something
[/quote]

This may not be real life, but desire is still extremely important. Desire is motivation to train, prepare & fight hard.

And as those before me said, most members who join neutral alliances have little to no desire for war. Some will fight to defend themselves, but even many of them will probably do poorly. Attacking with 5 through 50 bombers. Doing ground attacks before anything else, etc, etc. I've seen it enough among warring alliances I can only imagine how terrible it would be for a neutral. Many [i]will[/i] surrender.

Just like a nation with no desire to learn & build their nation will have a crappy nation. Those with no desire to prepare, train and fight will be a crappy fighter.

[enderland]

[quote name='Sarmatian Empire' timestamp='1326901982' post='2902144']I dont doubt WTF's nations war ability on their individual ability, I dont know who plays TE and what alliances they were in beforehand, but in a coordination sense it would be a major problem I'm sure. Unless they have done this on TE or something
[/quote]

Not to mention the diferences between alliance warfare in CN:SE and CN:TE.

Knowledge of TE helps especially if you have to coordinate, but, at the end of the day, they are two greatly different games.

[Natan]

[quote name='enderland' timestamp='1326907323' post='2902204']
Not to mention the diferences between alliance warfare in CN:SE and CN:TE.

Knowledge of TE helps especially if you have to coordinate, but, at the end of the day, they are two greatly different games.
[/quote]

Yes and no. Fanatics will tell you that theres more to the war system than just getting together with everyone on the target and ordering your attacks properly but honestly if you can do that consistently in a war with well prepared (or even decently prepared) nations you're going to do a damn lot of damage.

[Sarmatian Empire]

[quote name='Canik' timestamp='1326906811' post='2902199']
This may not be real life, but desire is still extremely important. Desire is motivation to train, prepare & fight hard.

And as those before me said, most members who join neutral alliances have little to no desire for war. Some will fight to defend themselves, but even many of them will probably do poorly. Attacking with 5 through 50 bombers. Doing ground attacks before anything else, etc, etc. I've seen it enough among warring alliances I can only imagine how terrible it would be for a neutral. Many [i]will[/i] surrender.

Just like a nation with no desire to learn & build their nation will have a crappy nation. Those with no desire to prepare, train and fight will be a crappy fighter.
[/quote]

I guess we see the word desire differently. I see it as something you care deeply to do and it excites you and what not. Sending a message asking for a tech deal to help balance your ratio isnt desire imo, it's just something you do.


[quote]Not to mention the diferences between alliance warfare in CN:SE and CN:TE.

Knowledge of TE helps especially if you have to coordinate, but, at the end of the day, they are two greatly different games. [/quote]

Yeah on a coordination scale I really dont know the different as I never coordinated in TE, but I believe the basic order of attacking is the same is it not?

[Beefspari]

Clearly the only way to settle this dispute is to declare war on all peaceful/neutral alliances.
[img]http://meru.xfury.net/images/aeris/aerisfffL10.jpg[/img]

[enderland]

[quote name='Natan' timestamp='1326909277' post='2902221']
Yes and no. Fanatics will tell you that theres more to the war system than just getting together with everyone on the target and ordering your attacks properly but honestly if you can do that consistently in a war with well prepared (or even decently prepared) nations you're going to do a damn lot of damage.
[/quote]

Well yes and no.

There is a strong element of "overwhelming stats always win" in CN. This is because a fair bit of damage is simply "click, cause unstoppable damage!"

But proper nation deployment, groupings, alliance strategy, intra-alliance strategy, nation/government activity, and coordination ([i]especially[/i] between those fighting same nations!) can really affect the damage an alliance gives and takes. Umbrella is a great example of an alliance which could really benefit from coordination and strategy in the small chance it gets singled out for destruction at some point.

Outnumbered alliances and coalitions tend to give up in this game in a way I simply don't get. Can you imagine if [b]all[/b] the alliances on the losing side of this war had declared against IRON (or any few alliances on that side), focusing on keeping all IRON's top/mid tier nations in nuclear anarchy and essentially destroying the alliance's stats through coordinated efforts? If the outnumbered parties left enough nations in peace mode to coordinate staggers against IRON nations continually for a month or longer?

Instead, what normally happens is defending alliances just DoW at will or get into "slugfests" (ie the "we'll just trade nukes for a while" strategy) against alliances they have no chance of truly hurting other than the first week of war, and so the possible damage gets spread over the entirety of the attacking coalition. Sometimes this is good, most of the time it is not really painful to the attackers though.

This is getting long so I will stop, hah. You could replace IRON with whatever alliance(s) you wanted on their side, btw.