Upper End of the War

[hapapants]

Assuming people honestly believe their positions here (not intentionally posting propaganda), it's really interesting how these two groups can have access to the same data and come to such completely different understandings of what's happening and what's going to happen with this war. My EQ bias must be showing because I look at those same AA's (plus Deinos) and think that they're probably not going to hang around and get beaten down that much further. For a smallish alliance to lose 33-50% of its NS is a traumatic thing. These aren't guys with $5 billion warchests who can laugh it off knowing that they'll just rebuy all their infra at the end. So while I'm pretty sure that the 100k+ NS range would/will eventually be overtaken by the DH side of things, that represents such a ridiculously small slice of the nations and overall NS engaged in this war that I don't really know what, if anything, it means for the bigger picture. What are the 5 "safe" upper tier guys going to say to the rest of their alliance that's getting ground down?

 

I love that there is even this kind of confusion and controversy though - this is by far the most interesting war I've seen in over 6 years. The idea that we could get locked into a stalemate with a DMZ is fascinating to me. I think it would be a really cool twist to the political environment moving forward, and seriously rejuvenate the game.

 

A few weeks ago, it was only 5-6 DH "super-nations" that were not being taken care of by EQ.  Today, we're looking at 20-30+ of these nations, who are free to hit the EQ upper-tier with no consequence.  This number is only going to grow the longer this war goes on.  EQ is not grinding these nations down - they're not even declaring on them!

 

There are two problems with dismissing this as a "small-slice" of the war:

1) This problem is growing at an alarming rate, and will continue to grow the longer the war goes on. 

2) Upper-tier losses (tech) are incredibly difficult to rebuild.  

 

EQ is going to win the middle-tier (obviously), but that really doesn't mater.  Middle-tiers are rebuildable.  The entire purpose of this conflict was about equalizing the upper-tiers in order to hold Umbrella politically accountable in the future.  But as things are, EQ simply isn't doing the job in the upper-tier, which was the whole goal of the conflict.  

Edited February 11, 2013 by hapapants

[Sweeeeet Ronny D]

Personally I expect the DH side to completely control 100k and up, but I would be really impressed if they can push that control down to the 80k and up range.  I dont think we have the numbers to control 50k and up.

[Commander shepard]

Your problem is that your initial blitz pushed down and churned out tons of Umbrella and TOP nations through a killzone / grinder. Some of these nations will delete, simply due to inactivity, but others will end up in the lower tier with massive warchests and full wonders. This means that as time goes on, your opponents will obtain a lower-tier superiority simply because your side is not prepared to deal with tens of nations kitted out like Timberland. It's all fun and games until nations with WRC and multi-billion NS start attacking your 10k-20k range.

 

The problem with this assumption is that the DH super nations have to send EQ upper tier somewhere, EQ upper tier is going down and is already largely down along with most of the other side's upper tier.

The DH side nations that fell are already outnumbered by equal or superior nations.

Nations with WRC's aren't so bad when they're been keep in permanent war for a long duration, they can only fire two nukes on average a day while EQ can recycle nations due to superior numbers.

Overall the lower tier is the death of DH nations.

[Vhalen]

It really isn't, because you only need one nuclear weapon a week to keep a nation in nuclear anarchy and unable to benefit from collections.  Once in bill lock, you and your nuclear weapons are dead weight, and DH nations are free to keep targeting you, expanding out of 'sniper' mode (3 defensive wars, 1 offensive war) to continue the bill lock.  And nuclear weapons cost quite a bit to upkeep, as does infrastructure.  Your folks can't sell their infra, either, because then they'd be out of range. 

 

This is a warchest and aid chain battle, plain and simple.  Nobody (on either side) seems terribly interested in posting their warchest spy results here, though.  I see a lot of bluster in these threads from both sides without any of the important information backing it up. 

Assuming immediate bill lock strikes me as awfully optimistic. It's pretty difficult to keep a nation in nuclear anarchy when the other side has the numbers and nukes advantages, and you yourself are in nuclear anarchy. Who's going to declare the next war? The "numbers game" is pretty simple, honestly. One side gets to collect out of nuclear anarchy, and it's not the side with the smaller numbers.

 

As for WC/aid, as has been previously pointed out, 60k is the same as 160k (or for that matter, 360k) so far as aid goes. If, as you propose, this war is going to be settled by aid, you'd think that would come down to simple numbers as well.

[Dochartaigh]

The reason I prefer grinder / killzone over shark tank is because shark tanks go all the way to the bottom. Grinders, on the other hand, imply processing, as do killzones. What I am really expecting to see this war is that DH achieves a killzone, moving slowly downwards, from the 140k range on, with occasional EQ nations dropping out of peace mode for harassment / suicide. Below their killzone is EQ's killzone, anything that enters that killzone will get wrecked. And even further below that, you'll have yet another DH killzone, where the detritus from EQ's killzone reorganizes and stomps EQ nations in that range.

 

All this is based on various assumptions. First one, is that the EQ side is made up solely of incompetent, ill-prepared nations. The second one, is that the DH/CnG side is made up of solely elite/competent/well built nations. The third, is that those on DH/CnG side want to continue being in the middle of the current EQ grinder/kill zone. Sure, TOP/Umbrella/MK are well prepared. So is a good portion of TLR/GATO/ODN/INT but we can look at the NS losses for VE/Deinos/INT/ODN/MW/UcON/TSO/Alchemy. Sure, they have some upper tier and I am sure some of the nations in EQ's grinder/killzone can last a while longer but do you honestly think all of them can? Sooner or later, there will be surrenders on your side of the war. This means that there will be less nations that EQ will be fighting. Unless of course, you expect VE/MW/Deinos/UcON/Alchemy/TSO to continue to just get pounded until they are looking like miniature GOONs alliances while Umb/MK/TOP and the rest just build up above the fighting? That seems to be quite a thing to expect from even an ally.

[Sardonic]

It should be pretty obvious what the game here is by this point. eQ is just going to harass the upper tier in Umbrella and Company to keep them from escaping while the lower and mid tier gets evicerated. Anyone seen Viridian Entente and International lately? Things are not happy outside the 50 or so "upper tier" nations at the top of DH's little pyramid scheme. Below that, its a blood bath.

Not that this is the place to discuss this, being a lower tier discussion and all, but at least from GOONS' perspective we're certainly not getting evicerated, we're doing a great deal of damage, especially to some of the more foolish nations who declared on us with no nukes and no war chests. Hell, for some reason or another, probably aid chains, we're barely even losing NS at this point.

[lamuella]

Assuming people honestly believe their positions here (not intentionally posting propaganda)

 

I think it's fair to assume instead that both sides recognize the forums as a different kind of battlefield.  It's not a question of which side is tailoring the truth but rather which tailored truth has a better fit on the reader.

[the rebel]

The problem with this assumption is that the DH super nations have to send EQ upper tier somewhere, EQ upper tier is going down and is already largely down along with most of the other side's upper tier.

The DH side nations that fell are already outnumbered by equal or superior nations.

Nations with WRC's aren't so bad when they're been keep in permanent war for a long duration, they can only fire two nukes on average a day while EQ can recycle nations due to superior numbers.

Overall the lower tier is the death of DH nations.

 

Some of their posters seem to assume that the EQ top tier has just vanished from the game and dont include them in their thoughts of the mid tier.

 

Not that this is the place to discuss this, being a lower tier discussion and all, but at least from GOONS' perspective we're certainly not getting evicerated, we're doing a great deal of damage, especially to some of the more foolish nations who declared on us with no nukes and no war chests. Hell, for some reason or another, probably aid chains, we're barely even losing NS at this point.

 

With such a low average nation strength the overall damage is going to be negligible as each tiny nation with just as little as a million could rebuild the lost NS during war, when considering that 69% of your NS is in peacemode also accounts towards low loses...

[Dochartaigh]

Not that this is the place to discuss this, being a lower tier discussion and all, but at least from GOONS' perspective we're certainly not getting evicerated, we're doing a great deal of damage, especially to some of the more foolish nations who declared on us with no nukes and no war chests. Hell, for some reason or another, probably aid chains, we're barely even losing NS at this point.

 

From Jan 25th, GOONs went from 3,718,696 NS to today sitting at 1,919,378 (since I know this will be discussed, taking out the NS loss due to Umar joining DBDC brings the NS to 2,076,162) . That means in 18 days GOONs has lost a total of 44.2% of their total NS (again, minus Umar) in 18 days. It has only really been since the 7th that it began tapering off but only due to the fact that the GOONs nations that can actually suffer considerable damage (out of your upper 30 nations only 3 are in war mode) are in PM. So of course your war damage is going to decrease. (you haveover 1million of your NS in PM right now which is more than half of your total remaining NS) Considering at nation #59 we reach the 9k NS range so from #59-167 your NS ranges are from 1k-9,999k and then from #168-#205 it is 999 and under, no wonder you aren't losing much NS, there simply is not that much to lose anymore. Your alliance is already eviscerated and what nations have not been eviscerated are chilling in PM and have been since before GOONs entered the war. (out of the top 9, most entered PM between the 17th-19th with one nation having entered on the 24th) I am pretty certain that the rest of your nations in PM will be similar. So most of those nations in PM only escaped evisceration through hiding in PM.

 

Your example does not actually discount anything Sardonic. Bring out those nations in PM in the upper 30. If they do not get eviscerated within a week or 2, you will have proven your point. Otherwise, GOONs has been and the rest are hiding in PM to escape their fate.

[Yevgeni Luchenkov]

Yeah, too bad only one side of this war has anyone with warchests and such, eh Yevgheni? 

I don't count. My nation never was in the upper tier and I'm really reckless with it. I also acknowledged that DT have good warchests before in the thread. ;) The thing is that DT is an exception rather than the norm in the eQ coalition. You're good fighters and good people. But you're also not the guys who hate DH so much that you will spend all your money to rebuy infra to declare up on some nations to "grind them down", suiciding your nation in the process.

 

 

------

 

Comparing the Matt Miller - Grämlins scenario to today is wrong on a few levels. Warchests have only grown since 2010. Above a billion was considered a decent warchest back then. Matt Miller had a few billions, if I recall correctly. Nowadays, many nations have over 10. Many more are between 5 and 10. Tech has also grown a lot and tech is tougher to destroy. Which is why you're having trouble sending nations with 15k+ tech down to your "meatgrinder". If everybody still had 7-10k tech, you'd have a point. However, it seems whoever designed your strategy had not updated his books since then.

[Namayan]

All this is based on various assumptions. First one, is that the EQ side is made up solely of incompetent, ill-prepared nations. The second one, is that the DH/CnG side is made up of solely elite/competent/well built nations. The third, is that those on DH/CnG side want to continue being in the middle of the current EQ grinder/kill zone. Sure, TOP/Umbrella/MK are well prepared. So is a good portion of TLR/GATO/ODN/INT but we can look at the NS losses for VE/Deinos/INT/ODN/MW/UcON/TSO/Alchemy. Sure, they have some upper tier and I am sure some of the nations in EQ's grinder/killzone can last a while longer but do you honestly think all of them can? Sooner or later, there will be surrenders on your side of the war. This means that there will be less nations that EQ will be fighting. Unless of course, you expect VE/MW/Deinos/UcON/Alchemy/TSO to continue to just get pounded until they are looking like miniature GOONs alliances while Umb/MK/TOP and the rest just build up above the fighting? That seems to be quite a thing to expect from even an ally.

Pixels are only valuable to those who value it very much. I welcome the beating on my nation down from my starting 100kNS. I even expect to be ZIed and enjoy the months of war to come from eQuilibrium.

[shahenshah]

Your problem is that your initial blitz pushed down and churned out tons of Umbrella and TOP nations through a killzone / grinder. Some of these nations will delete, simply due to inactivity, but others will end up in the lower tier with massive warchests and full wonders. This means that as time goes on, your opponents will obtain a lower-tier superiority simply because your side is not prepared to deal with tens of nations kitted out like Timberland. It's all fun and games until nations with WRC and multi-billion NS start attacking your 10k-20k range.

By the same logic, there will be plenty of EQ nations on dQ and if you are also running with dQ will push more of EQ down, you'll actually have alot more of the heavy nations of EQ moving around in mid and lower-upper tiers. Alot of your allies will have to choose between ~5% of their nations or 95% of their nations. People will put up alot of tough words here, but we've all been here long enough to know that's alot of internal pressure on govt. Yea sure its all fun and games in the first month, by third, you'll know and many of your allies will be facing this pressure for the very first time, which only makes it worse.
 
Another aspect is number of nukes in non-peace mode, that number is falling rapidly for anyone on dQ not at top top tiers and without nukes and infra, your damage output really takes a dive regardless of tech. This effect is already kicking in and will get more profound as time passes. Edited February 11, 2013 by shahenshah

[Prodigal Moon]

A few weeks ago, it was only 5-6 DH "super-nations" that were not being taken care of by EQ.  Today, we're looking at 20-30+ of these nations, who are free to hit the EQ upper-tier with no consequence.  This number is only going to grow the longer this war goes on.  EQ is not grinding these nations down - they're not even declaring on them!

 

There are two problems with dismissing this as a "small-slice" of the war:

1) This problem is growing at an alarming rate, and will continue to grow the longer the war goes on. 

2) Upper-tier losses (tech) are incredibly difficult to rebuild.  

 

EQ is going to win the middle-tier (obviously), but that really doesn't mater.  Middle-tiers are rebuildable.  The entire purpose of this conflict was about equalizing the upper-tiers in order to hold Umbrella politically accountable in the future.  But as things are, EQ simply isn't doing the job in the upper-tier, which was the whole goal of the conflict.  

 

I'm still not too concerned about 20-30+ nations. That's like OBR and Creole trying to turn the tides of an otherwise lopsided global war. It's debatable how much this upper tier superiority will expand. But keep in mind that some of these nations are simply going to end up out of range of anyone in EQ. And the lower you try to expand the range of dominance, the more you're going to run into EQ's number advantage.

 

I readily acknowledge that EQ has failed to completely topple the DH upper tier, and lack the resoruces to bring them down into range and keep them staggered at this point. But from what I'm seeing, it looks like EQ has erroded DH enough to make EQ's overall victory credible. Victory will be determined through NS losses, WC's, and political will. If EQ had kept their upper tier in PM and tried to avoid facing the DH upper tier, we might arrive at the same result, but it would lack the credibility that they've build by dragging so many people down. 30+ nations that escaped aren't going to take much away from that, and the failure to equalize the tech disparity can be addressed through targeted reps (e.g., "Pay 250k tech from nations with 10k tech or more).

Edited February 11, 2013 by Prodigal Moon

[Aeros]

All I am getting from this thread is a that a few elite nations that the OP is apparently able to list by name as there are so few of them in the grand scheme of things, will be able to happily stand upon the ashes that were the vast majority of their alliances and declare victory.

 

The fact is, DH cannot hurt Equilibrium. Hell, several Equilibrium alliances (Sparta, Fark) have picked up Sanctioned alliance status due to this war, and the Sanctioned DR alliances are more or less standing steady now that DH is hard pressed to counter any them. Sorry, I have a very different definition of what victory looks like, and saving 60 nations from annihilation at the cost of 1,700 nations give or take, does not constitute victory. If playing keep away by burning through the vast majority of your members to save some ancient piles of tech constitutes victory, well then bravo. *golf claps*. You have "won".

Edited February 11, 2013 by Aeros

[Sardonic]

All I am getting from this thread is a that a few elite nations that the OP is apparently able to list by name as there are so few of them in the grand scheme of things, will be able to happily stand upon the ashes that were the vast majority of their alliances and declare victory.

 

The fact is, DH cannot hurt Equilibrium.

Well except for the billions in damage to your upper tier nations, and the billions your top nation wasted by rebuying infra during their war, sure.  Don't break your hand patting yourselves on the back for a job well done, you won't be getting any payoff at the end of this war.

With such a low average nation strength the overall damage is going to be negligible as each tiny nation with just as little as a million could
rebuild the lost NS during war, when considering that 69% of your NS is in peacemode also accounts towards low loses...

This is a fair point, though the incompetence of the entities fighting GOONS cannot be understated.

 

 

Blah Blah

Used "GOONs" unironically, didn't read.  We're having fun, and that's the important thing.

Edited February 11, 2013 by Sardonic

[Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz]

The failure to equalize the tech disparity can be addressed through targeted reps (e.g., "Pay 250k tech from nations with 10k tech or more).

 

Good luck with trying to extract reparations. I know I'm not gonna be paying you lot one red cent.

[Dochartaigh]

Pixels are only valuable to those who value it very much. I welcome the beating on my nation down from my starting 100kNS. I even expect to be ZIed and enjoy the months of war to come from eQuilibrium.

 

I am not doubting that mate. Many nations on your side most likely feel the same but do all of them? If y'all continue fighting, what do you honestly expect your damage output to become? Most of UcON is under 30k NS. How many nations do you expect to retain if they are sitting at ZI? Hell, for all I know it could be all of them or none of them. You may want to fight for months, but does your entire alliance? Particularly if they have 7 of their alliance mates continue to sit in PM for the duration of the war, while they get pounded?

 

Again, I am not saying I know UcON, just that a long war is not what most nations playing CN want to endure. It can become tedious and boring to most, particularly if they are simply getting beatdown and foresee little hope of actually doing much.

[Drai]

All I am getting from this thread is a that a few elite nations that the OP is apparently able to list by name as there are so few of them in the grand scheme of things, will be able to happily stand upon the ashes that were the vast majority of their alliances and declare victory.

 

The fact is, DH cannot hurt Equilibrium. Hell, several Equilibrium alliances (Sparta, Fark) have picked up Sanctioned alliance status due to this war, and the Sanctioned DR alliances are more or less standing steady now that DH is hard pressed to counter any them. Sorry, I have a very different definition of what victory looks like, and saving 60 nations from annihilation at the cost of 1,700 nations give or take, does not constitute victory. If playing keep away by burning through the vast majority of your members to save some ancient piles of tech constitutes victory, well then bravo. *golf claps*. You have "won".

But everything under 80k takes all of what, 6 months to rebuild? To get to 100k+ can take at least a year, or 3.

 

A lot of the nations you have brought down and included in the '1700' have warchests that will allow them to easily rebuild. They have also proven to be more active at buying tech and will inevitably reach the top tier faster than most on the EQ side.

[Dochartaigh]

Well except for the billions in damage to your upper tier nations, and the billions your top nation wasted by rebuying infra during their war, sure.

 

 

This is a fair point.

 

 

Used "GOONs" unironically, didn't read.  We're having fun, and that's the important thing.

 

Glad you are having fun mate. To me that is what war is about. I personally don't care about winning or losing (I know my nation matters very little in the grand scheme of things) though I do like winning as much as the next  guy. Again, glad you are having fun mate.

[Prodigal Moon]

Good luck with trying to extract reparations. I know I'm not gonna be paying you lot one red cent.

Personally I have mixed feelings on reps, don't know if there is a plan to demand any in case of victory, and definitely won't be personally involved in deciding that. Just thinking through what stepts EQ might attempt for addressing the post-war upper tier disadvantage.

[Mogar]

Well except for the billions in damage to your upper tier nations, and the billions your top nation wasted by rebuying infra during their war, sure.  Don't break your hand patting yourselves on the back for a job well done, you won't be getting any payoff at the end of this war.

you cant sit here and pretend we havent cost your upper tier nations billions as well, you just happened to have a great deal more of them than we did, and those 30 or so nations can enjoy their super tier status while we grind the rest of you into submission.

[shahenshah]

Well except for the billions in damage to your upper tier nations, and the billions your top nation wasted by rebuying infra during their war, sure.  Don't break your hand patting yourselves on the back for a job well done, you won't be getting any payoff at the end of this war.
This is a fair point, though the incompetence of the entities fighting GOONS cannot be understated.
 
 
Used "GOONs" unironically, didn't read.  We're having fun, and that's the important thing.

Alot of your friends have spent alot of money but failed to escape that range, so the damage you talk about is not one way. As for not paying at end of war etc, not sure your alliance would be capable of paying anything anyway and that's what they all say. Personally I have mixed feelings on reps on some of the alliances but I'm open to creative solutions, of which there are many ;). Good to know we're all having fun. One of the more interesting wars in a v. long time. 
 
Also, gl rebuilding 1700 nations with little or no infra, tech and wcs to 80k in 6 months with 50 nations. lol Edited February 11, 2013 by shahenshah

[kwell]

This war has been a blast and I fully expect the eq forces to pay for my tech for the next 3 to 6 months due to their failure to beat us down when they came at us.  That being said, if they do not agree to those terms, I can continue fighting for the next year.  I still haven't been able to nuke a NPO nation :-( 

[Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz]

Also, gl rebuilding 1700 nations with little or no infra, tech and wcs to 80k in 6 months with 50 nations. lol

 

Also, gl ever trying to rebuild above 100k. lol

[Drai]

Alot of your friends have spent alot of money but failed to escape that range, so the damage you talk about is not one way. As for not paying at end of war etc, not sure your alliance would be capable of paying anything anyway and that's what they all say. Personally I have mixed feelings on reps on some of the alliances but I'm open to creative solutions, of which there are many ;). Good to know we're all having fun. One of the more interesting wars in a v. long time. 
 
Also, gl rebuilding 1700 nations with little or no infra, tech and wcs to 80k in 6 months with 50 nations. lol

Longer rebuilding time just reinforces my point further. EQ is going to have an even longer wait trying to get top tier nations again. The 6 month was a rough estimate but intended to be referencing the nations you've brought down from our upper/mid tier to the sub-80k range. Those are the ones who will still have some tech to their name and money in the bank.

Edited February 11, 2013 by Drai