Upper End of the War

[Commander shepard]

The damage you're doing is of little consequence in the long run. You, on the other hand, have sacrificed any chance of ever having a competitive top tier again. Doesn't sound like something to hope for to me but to each his own.

Not sure extra time to build  before this war would have allowed EQ top tiers to be that much more competitive against the other side unless it was an extra year or two.

I believe the damage is significant given the vast majority of your side's nations reside in the the dominant EQ sectors where they will be torn down and kept in war.

And if all we done is make it so a handful of DH nations are unreachable then I guess that is something we have to live by.

Edited February 19, 2013 by Commander shepard

[lebubu]

Point being, there are plenty of creative solutions.

I'm sure there are but preventing someone from going rogue is a ridiculous notion.

[Brehon]

Your the only one owning up to wanting this war on your side.  The others try to claim we started it. 

 

But lets be honest, your in it to get back at Natan for the DH-NPO war.

 

Actually that part isn't true.  I was fine with letting that be but the BS didn't stop with DH/NPO.  In fact as I have openly stated repeatedly this is about issues well more recent.  Issues I wasn't quiet about.  So that leads to this question: why did you all keep needling?

[Baldr]

I'm sure there are but preventing someone from going rogue is a ridiculous notion.

Yes, it is. Which makes his "You can not stop me from going rogue" argument pointless.

As it stands, he has no need to go rogue, war is easy to find.

[Do Not Fear Jazz]

Actually that part isn't true.  I was fine with letting that be but the BS didn't stop with DH/NPO.  In fact as I have openly stated repeatedly this is about issues well more recent.  Issues I wasn't quiet about.  So that leads to this question: why did you all keep needling?

However this alone becomes an admission of the fact that you desperately want Umbrella gone. Though I'm sure you have your own rationalizations, it's because you want to be the central power.

[Chad]

However this alone becomes an admission of the fact that you desperately want Umbrella gone. Though I'm sure you have your own rationalizations, it's because you want to be the central power.

No one really cares about Umbrella anymore. Now the war is about Doomhouse inflicting as much damage upon Duckroll as possible. And, perhaps even more important, the destruction of CnG.

[Sardonic]

Credit where credit is due, at least Brehon can admit that EQ instigated the war.

[Do Not Fear Jazz]

Credit where credit is due, at least Brehon can admit that EQ instigated the war.

This is a fair point, then again Brehon is the only person on that side of the war that has been basically honest the entire time.

[Pingu]

No one really cares about Umbrella anymore. Now the war is about Doomhouse inflicting as much damage upon Duckroll as possible. And, perhaps even more important, the destruction of CnG.

 

I'm not sure why it should be so important to destroy CnG. But if that's a war aim for the Derp Rush, you are in for considerable disappointment. Sorry and all that.

[jerdge]

Let's try to resume what concepts we refined here to move to the next step of this discussion, OK? Here's my draft.

 

Assuming that this war is dragged long enough:

1. Co ("Competence") will win the battle in the "Upper End" (they already won it if you define the "Upper End" narrowly enough).

2. A DMZ will be established.

3. Eq ("Equilibrium") will win the battle below the DMZ.

 

 

Points of discussion:

 

Is the number of Co nations that will be able to stay over the DMZ all that crucial? Let's assume that the ceiling of the DMZ will be between 80k and 100k NS. Co has around 1.7k nations ATM, of which around 100-200* can be expected to finish the war over the DMZ. That's a not that small minority that will have a significant impact in financing the "rebuilding" of the remaining of their coalition. Their importance will also lay in the high tech levels they will likely be able to preserve.

Other Co nations that end below the DMZ will also preserve large amounts of money to finance the rebuilding with. Their number and the tech levels they'll be able to salvage both depend basically on the duration of the war.

 

Considering the great number of 4k+ infra nations that I expect Eq to retain, I will assume that they won't have any intrinsic post war financial (aid slots) shortage.

 

The longer Eq manages to keep the war going (I am here assuming that Co would instantly accept an offer for a generalized white peace), the worse will be the post-war condition of the sub-DMZ share of Co.

This is one of the key points, as effectively breaking the financial capability of Co mid tiers is an essential goal for Eq (from what I read on these forums I guess that downsizing their rival is a major objective for them).

 

 

Eq has a definite advantage in numbers (the human wave, as Branimir put it) which isn't IMHO large enough to automatically guarantee that they'll be able to indefinitely keep Co sub-DMZ nations under pressure ("pressure" = perma Peace Mode or ZI+ZT/perma war). 3:1 is good but not ideal.

Co is anyway obviously in a worse position, thus it is basically impossible for them to gain the upper hand there.

 

 

One possible outcome (A.) is that Eq wins the sub-DMZ fight, but without completely vanquishing Co. This would mean that a long and painful fray may convince some Eq fringe alliances that it's time for them to raise the white flag and leave the field. In this scenario Co will probably get enough leverage to snatch a draw (that both sides will then call a "strategic victory") that will allow them to basically continue with their pre-war lead preserved.

In this sense Eq would probably have failed their main alleged goal and Co could thus actually call it a victory.

 

Another possible outcome (B.) is that Eq decisively wins the sub-DMZ fight, basically obliterating the stats of some Co alliances. This scenario may cause some Co fringe alliances to give up, rendering irreversible the Eq sub-DMZ victory. Political cohesion and will is absolutely crucial to determine what will happen in this stage.

 

Should Eq eventually completely "clear" the sub-DMZ zone we can expect one of the following to happen:

B.a. Co surrenders basically saving their "Super Layer" (what will be over the DMZ) and without crippling/hampering terms.

B.b. Co surrenders with terms designed to jeopardize the superiority of their Super Layer, or they're slowly grinded down one by one Gre style.

 

 

The key factor will IMHO be the politics. The side with most cohesion will be able to either attain A or B.

 

 

* Please consider that I am mostly pulling numbers out from thin air (I mean: I make educated guesses) as my point isn't to provide stats (I'd love to but I am not going to) but rather to try draft a framework for a meaningful continuation of this discussion. Feel free to provide better data.

 

 

[hr]

(Not so) clerical short notes:

i. How long past wars went on for is indicative but not a final datum IMHO.

Past wars were rarely (if ever) this even and uncertain, and that can very well have played a role in putting an earlier end to most of them. The "long resistances" of isolated parties were basically wars in which the "resistance" refused to concede whatever political advantage the winning party was demanding; they weren't wars in which going on for several months actually made any sense from a gameplay (game mechanics) point of view. In this case a prolonged war actually makes sense, for Eq. It's in fact the best path for them to attain their (alleged) goal, if they can stomach it.

ii. I honestly don't see how the possibility that a few nations like Timmehhh's or oyababy's go rogue post-war should have all that weight in influencing decisions in either field.

AFAIK the only high profile lone fighter that - in seven years of CN - ever made it past a couple of months was Vlad. Almost all the high profile rogues don't delete when they have depleted all their money/nukes/tech, but when they get bored of the same everyday routine. While individual characters and/or circumstances may change this (Vlad had a lot of fans and "support" IIRC) the general rule that rogues eventually get bored and delete is very well time-tested, and there's no serious reason to think that anyone will last much longer than I (of all people) may do. Which isn't much.

One can say one thing now, but in one, two, three months it must get pretty dull and hard to endure.

Edited February 19, 2013 by jerdge

[shahenshah]

I'm sure there are but preventing someone from going rogue is a ridiculous notion

Then I'm sure you'll have no problem if people from our side go rogue too. 

Edited February 19, 2013 by shahenshah

[Namayan]

Let's try to resume what concepts we refined here to move to the next step of this discussion, OK? Here's my draft.

Hi jerd. Thank you for resuming. With regards to DMZ, I do not think it exists yet.

According to this statistics which is dated Feb 11(http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/blog/811/entry-3683-stats-itb-4/), 100K+ is Co territory while between 100k-80kNS is Eq territory. There seems to be a statistical tie between 60k-80k based on percentage loss.

So unless someone gathers actual data on lower than 80K tiers and divided them by War Front, we cannot assume who is winning the wars below 80K NS. With regards to the C&G front, the 80K and below wars has not even yet started. So the data, will probably be more available at the 80K NS and below where there alliances on both sides fighting both in the Original front and the TOP-DT front.

[Daikos]

Then I'm sure you'll have no problem if people from our side go rogue too. 

 

I don't think anyone has any concerns about your infra inflated mid tier going rogue.

[Branimir]

No one really cares about Umbrella anymore. Now the war is about Doomhouse inflicting as much damage upon Duckroll as possible. And, perhaps even more important, the destruction of CnG.

This line is great to signify how all the posted analysis fall short, as they oversimplify the reality at the end of the day. Also obsess about something which isnt crucial. Just a propaganda talking point.

 

We are not dealing with monolithic entities here. More so true for the larger side, which is also in many ways only natural. That translated to many things-- distinct war fronts, deployment fallowing political not "strategic" sense, different visions and reasons why many fight. Far more so then if an isolated small island of top tier nations is formed, on this political reality smaller side banks their hopes for quicker end for this war to minimize the damage taken. It must be clear to all from the start that white peace is how this will end (if somebody goes full retard and does not offer that, shall only write its death sentence for post war).

 

The quoted line so nicely highlights that.

 

I only care about Umbrella. I am far from alone in that, Id even say that for those fighting for the original 5 DoWers this is by far the most important point. We want to hurt Umbrella. We feel as we were poked one too many times by them. Rubbed the wrong way one too many times by their arrogance.

 

At the same time, many on the perceived same side dont really care about that much. That is fine. Even further so, many who fight on the same perceived side as Umb, dont really care much about Umb  either. That is fine as well.

 

This is a complex war. Realities of one front, are not true for another. Wanted destruction will happen. Satisfying many. Cards will get reshuffled, the old reality is dead and buried already. How exactly will things turn out once the dust settles, I dunno. But this war is good as it will change some dynamics, refreshing things and allow for some frustrations to release. 

[bhane]

Your problem is you can't hurt Umbrella.  We're out of your range.  We'll rebuild a lot faster than you side too. 

You can't destroy us.  You can't make us fear or respect you.  We are always going to be a thorn in your side because we remember what NPO is like at the top.  Karma changed the world.  No longer will you be able to install viceroys or demand ridiculous reparations or force alliances to disband.  You'll always be a shell of what you once were.  You will always be bitter and nasty and hate us for it.  Maybe one day you'll learn to deal with it.  

[Do Not Fear Jazz]

Your problem is you can't hurt Umbrella.  We're out of your range.  We'll rebuild a lot faster than you side too. 
You can't destroy us.  You can't make us fear or respect you.  We are always going to be a thorn in your side because we remember what NPO is like at the top.  Karma changed the world.  No longer will you be able to install viceroys or demand ridiculous reparations or force alliances to disband.  You'll always be a shell of what you once were.  You will always be bitter and nasty and hate us for it.  Maybe one day you'll learn to deal with it.

Does this mean I can't be TRASH CAN Viceroy when they inevitably surrender?

[Timmmehhh]

I wouldn't be suprised if within the next month the Q side has has only a handful warmode nations above 10k tech left.

[Daimos]

Your problem is you can't hurt Umbrella.  We're out of your range.  We'll rebuild a lot faster than you side too. 

You can't destroy us.  You can't make us fear or respect you.  We are always going to be a thorn in your side because we remember what NPO is like at the top.  Karma changed the world.  No longer will you be able to install viceroys or demand ridiculous reparations or force alliances to disband.  You'll always be a shell of what you once were.  You will always be bitter and nasty and hate us for it.  Maybe one day you'll learn to deal with it.  

 

Is this the root of Umbrella's hatred of NPO?  Viceroys and forced disbandment?  NPO has not done this since I became a member close to 4 years now.

 

You need new material or you need to get out of that cocoon you have been living in.

[Branimir]

Your problem is you can't hurt Umbrella.  We're out of your range.  We'll rebuild a lot faster than you side too. 

You can't destroy us.  You can't make us fear or respect you.  We are always going to be a thorn in your side because we remember what NPO is like at the top.  Karma changed the world.  No longer will you be able to install viceroys or demand ridiculous reparations or force alliances to disband.  You'll always be a shell of what you once were.  You will always be bitter and nasty and hate us for it.  Maybe one day you'll learn to deal with it.  

Of course that NPO can not hurt you without massive help. You made sure of that in the DH-NPO war when what was left of our top tier after "karma" war was obliterated. We weren't allowed to have a top tier for years after "karma". We were arrogant, brutal with our power. Careless and not emphatic. We paid for that in two brutal wars. Massive reps, massive wars of destruction came upon us as a result of our politics. So no upper tier, cost to pay for being dicks.

 

But you see, time passes. Years. NPOs roster changed dramatically. NPO changed how it operates as well. NPO is many things, but being full retard aint one. Unacceptability and harmfulness of our previous politics made clear to us. There is no fucking chance in hell we could possibly do that again. Not only us, but anyone really. World changed, politics are different. You fallow, change or die off. You dont keep to exist for 7 plus years by not learning.

 

We dont resent you over "karma". That is a deeply foolish notion. You see, many of our allies were on the "karmic side". We moved on with ourselves. Lesson learned, and learned well.

 

No, we dont like you do to you being dicks to us. Ultimately, it seems its you who didnt moved passed "karma", and are stuck up in things years ago. You act like arrogant dicks and pissed off a lot of folks. Hence, alliances that DoWed you. Its not only us. Far from it. NPO and its mid tier is here to chew on anything that falls into our range. We take great satisfaction in doing it. Our goal is not to destroy you, that is impossible and just stupid in general. Alliances destroy themselves, never are they destroyed from outside. Also, we dont need less people and alliances, but more.

 

You can feel free to try to rationalize why you pissed off many people with your antics with "karma" and whatnot. But world moved on. So did you. This propaganda is pointless, issues here are recent not "pre karmic", they dont have anything to do with it.

[Vasily Blyukher]

The Doomhouse Front

 

Totals for Doomhouse:

100k+ NS Nations: 17 war/10 peace

90k to 100k: 4 war / 3 peace

80k to 90k: 7 war / 1 peace

70k to 80k: 12 war / 4 peace

60k to 70k: 8 war / 6 peace

 

EQ Totals

 

100k+ NS Nations: 3 war/ 18 peace

90k to 100k: 9 war / 17 peace

80k to 90k: 32 war / 11 peace

70k to 80k: 43 war / 17 peace

60k to 70k: 67 war / 18 peace

 

 

First, 11 days since my last update?  Time does fly.  Now then, diving in, on the DH side I'm only tracking actual AAs, no Doombird Cave or anything like that.  So just assume the normal fine print about how DH likes forces to migrate around.  To begin with EQ has lost 17 nations from over 100k since last time I checked, DH has lost 11 nations.  

 

One thing that has struck me the last few times I run stats has been how few war mode nations the core five of EQ have out.  Bubbler Nation is the the only guy out and in combat currently.  Now then to be fair, it has been 11 days which is plenty of time for a nation to come out, fight a 7 day war, and dart back into peace mode to rearm.  However if you break it down a little for those over 100k:

 

NPO Peacemodes:

Belgi: Since 23 Jan 

Espanola: Since 10 Jan

Sludgeville: Since 9 Jan

Wilsonovia: Since 10 Jan

Suttonia: Since 9 Jan

 

AI Peacemodes:

Avtomatia: Since 17 Jan

Gaussia: Since 18 Jan

aboooe: Since 18 Jan

 

IRON Peacemodes

Island of Darkness: Since 14 Feb

Borat-stan: Since 13 Feb

 

NATO Peacemodes:

420peaceland: Since 19 Jan

 

TIO Peacemodes:

Minilla Island: Since 19 Jan

Vegeria: Since 18 Jan

SchaeferEmpire: Since 19 Jan

Republic of Scag: Since 30 Jan

 

MK and Umbrella Peacemodes:

6 Total, 2 date to pre 1 Feb 2013

 

Basically the findings here are that aside from three nations, everyone ducked in during mid January and hasn't been out since.  Now if you're Milcom you're likely thinking "I see people who didn't meet warchest requirements".  The second idea I've seen brought up is that the core of EQ knows all their allies won't make it across the finish line.  So these nations are the reserve force to come in when allies peace out.  I have mixed feelings on this last ditch reserve force as doing such a thing comes with a cost.  Namely letting MK and Umbrella nations go pillage on other fronts while hoping they take enough damage that bringing this reserve in will be a decisive blow later on.  The third option is, if you're a shit poster, you already have a peace mode joke typed in the Quick Reply box.  

 

What this suggest though is that well first off that NATO nation was honest with his naming.  Secondly it means to engage those big DH nations EQ is going to need to declare up as it appears the 100k nations currently in peace mode are comfy there and not regularly cycling in and out to help fight.  EQ does have 9 nations out in the 90k to 100k range and 32 out in the 80k to 90k range. Of course the problem is those up declaring EQ nations are basically walking up and saying "Hello Mr. Large Umbrella Nation, please fire nukes at me that have three times the tech bonus my nukes do."  

 

On the TOP front it look 1.7 EQ nations per TOP nation to drag down TOP nations in the last stats check.  In the most recently exchange on the DH front was 1.5 EQ nations per DH nation removed.  So to remove 25 DH nations would cost EQ somewhere in the 38 to 43 nations.  EQ clearly has that many nations in the 80k+ range.  However as shown with the long term EQ peacemodes some of the EQ nations may not be combat capable if you're of the "Well someone doesn't have a warchest" viewpoint.  

 

In addition DH has more tech while elements of EQ on this front have less.  TOP had less tech than Umbrella and did not require large scale up declares to hit, as the war mode odds always favored the EQ forces for 100k+.  Here EQ is going to have to declare up, which likely increases the size of the millstone that EQ is going to need to bring to the table.  

 

Stepping away from the 100k side of the war for a moment, I want to look at the 60k to 70k range.  Last time EQ had 108 nations in that range and DH had 27.  This update EQ has 85 and DH has 14.  So to take 13 DH nations out, cost EQ 23 nations.  Or in other words each DH nation took 1.8 EQ nations with it.  

 

First off these stats are of course skewed by the fact larger nations would fall into this range (with EQ having more falling currently).  However this should be a range that EQ dominates in, 50k nations can declare up to hit 66k nations to help the numerically superior 60k EQ nations.  Yet we're still seeing a high cost to bring down DH nations even in this range where DH can be swarmed over.  

 

If this kind of casualty ratio continues it is going to be a real problem for EQ.  If there is some massive battle royale going around down in 60k, it means EQ's 60k nations aren't as free to declare up and hit the 70k to 80k DH nations.  In turn that means those DH nations can engage the EQ nations in that range and limit the number free to declare up.  Suddenly you're at a point where EQ has 3 nations over 100k, plus only 20 to 30 nations that can up declare to support them.  23/33 versus 17 does provide the odds needed to drag down DH nations that stats so far seem to suggest you need.  Especially when the vast majority of those nations are up declares with lower damage output.  

 

C&G Front

So two new entries since last time, GDA and Apparatus.  I've added them into tracking.

 

 

Totals for C&G:

100k+ NS Nations: 31 war/20 peace

90k to 100k: 9 war / 11 peace

80k to 90k: 9 war / 19 peace

70k to 80k: 17 war / 22 peace

60k to 70k: 7 war / 19 peace

 

 

Totals for EQ:

100k+ NS Nations: 2 war/31 peace

90k to 100k: 18 war / 23 peace

80k to 90k: 31 war / 26 peace

70k to 80k: 45 war / 27 peace

60k to 70k: 85 war / 35 peace

 

So at the upper end a clear advantage to one side.  The cynic in me imagines that the EQ war planning channel is a bunch of people saying "No, you pull your reserves out of peacemode and go attack NG first."  Seriously though I'm seeing some problems where for EQ.  Many EQ nations are not peace mode cycling, rather they're in and staying in.  While on the C&G side, last time I did the stats, ODN and Int had pulled back into peacemode.  ODN is already starting to cycle out.  Int has yet to.  However the take away is C&G is showing signs of life and planned cycling in and out of peace mode in the upper tier.  Whereas EQ just sat there for the past 11 days and let NG + C&G eviscerate everyone over 100k, and some of people in the 90k range.  The damage totals are:

 

EQ Losses:

100k+ NS Nations: 21

90k to 100k: 7

 

NG/NOR/G&G Losses:

100k+ NS Nations: 20

90k to 100k: 12

 

The key issue here is that this was the front where EQ needed to be expensive to kill.  They needed to be the kind of nations that took 1.5 to 1.8 enemy nations to bring them down.  Instead above 90k it was 1.1 (actually below 1.0 when you take out the GDA and App nations that joined).  The result of that exchange is a front where EQ is going to require a significant amount of upward declarations to engage the large nations still fighting on the C&G side of things.  This likely ensures the gap only gets wider.  

 

In the 60k to 70k range, EQ again enjoys a major numbers advantage. EQ is up 13 nations in this range since the last stats check (8 from App and GDA).  C&G is down 5 nations in this range.  Honestly that isn't that great since last time I checked there.  The largest area of progress for EQ appears to be in the 80k to 90k range though.  C&G has gone from 46 to 28 (18 lost).  EQ has lost 11.  If EQ can keep clearing out this range, it opens the door for their surviving 80k+ nations to declare up and help out with the significant issues that EQ faces at the very top end.  

 

As a side note, with the massive number of sub 70k nations in play on this front for EQ, nations can be borrowed from this front to help deal with the DH nuke turrets and their damage ratio.  

 

In closing though I do want to point out that some EQ alliances seem to be fighting more than others.  Invicta for example has everything over 40k in peace mode and has been happy to stay that way for the most part.  One view of course is that alliances are being brought in and out of peace mode in a coordinated fashion and Invicta happens to be on reserve duty.  The other view is that Invicta is pretty much done with having their upper tier gutted and just doesn't want to be the first alliance out, so they're just using the doves to create a ceasefire.  The motive of that ceasefire of course is open to speculation.  The end result though is that when I do the stats I seem alliances heavily engaged with a lot of NS movement and others where it comes down to "Oh, everyone is peace mode still".  If EQ wants to maintain the credible threat of a numbers advantage lower down, they're going to need to show that everyone fights at some point.  

 

TOP Front

 

Totals for TOP+Friends:

100k+ NS Nations: 4 war/1 peace

90k to 100k: 3 war / 2 peace

80k to 90k: 4 war / 2 peace

70k to 80k: 6 war / 2 peace

60k to 70k: 6 war / 8 peace

 

 

Totals for EQ:

100k+ NS Nations: 8 war/14 peace

90k to 100k: 4 war / 4 peace

80k to 90k: 20 war / 12 peace

70k to 80k: 30 war / 12 peace

60k to 70k: 32 war / 9 peace

 

This front is fairly quiet.  The Dark Templar and Argent both suffered some losses, but that is likely in part due to the larger Umbrella/DBDC/etc nations migrating over to the TOP front to engage them.  TOP and company still just have out the nations they first brought into the war for the most part and seem content to let them fall and play nuke turret.  EQ has the numbers here to keep pushing those nuke turrets down and grinding away.

 

However I did find an interesting fact on the war screen:

 

Wars

Nebula X, 4 nations in war mode over 60k, 1 war

United Equestria, 1 nation in war mode over 60k, 2 in peace, 1 war

Cult of Justitia, all active wars with Umbrella nations

Molon Labe, all active wars with MK or Umbrella nations

 

Considering that CoJ contributes 4 of the nations over 100k to EQ on this front and Molon Labe contributes 1, that actually moves the needle on 100k+ so that TOP + Friends have 4 nations and EQ has 3 nations on this front in war mode. Also last time I posted, TOP members mentioned having at least 5 nations off AA, so that number might change further.  Also for the record, out of the 4 CoJ nations over 100k, 2 have no wars, the other 2 are engaging an Umbrella nation.  

 

The away here is that this front isn't seem to be as active as others and TOP+Friends are still going well.  They've lost 11 nations over 100k since the last update, while EQ has lost 9.  In terms of war mode nations is has gone from 18 EQ nations versus 7 TOP+Friends nations to 8 versus 4 (with not all of those 8 fighting or fighting on this front).  TOP has of course benefited from Umbrella nations migrating over here to fight Argent and TDT.

 

This is also another front you can borrow smaller nations from to go hit DH nuke turrets.

 

The Big Picture

First and foremost it appears that DH does have the ability to start clearing out nations on the TOP front in addition to continuing their removal of nations over 100k on their own front.  Meanwhile the C&G front is also going well for the large nations on the C&G side.  Broken record part: People should have refrained from poking NG with that stick for as long as possible.

 

The really problematic thing for EQ as I see it the war of attrition going on down in the lower tiers and the number of EQ nations it is taking to swarm over DH nuke turrets.  That is limiting the forces available for upward declares and making the large nation shorter that much worse for EQ.  EQ definitely needs to make some progress here and really maul some of those turrets. 

 

Political will of course plays a major role in deciding most wars.  Right now though it seems to be reaching a point for EQ where the political will is about to become a larger issue.  The war is reaching a point where soon DH will have the forces to down declare if they desire and start clearing out everyone above 80k (a 110k NS nation can hit strike down to 83k).  While EQ has superior numbers in the 80k to 90k range on paper, there are some alliances who are trying a lot harder than others.  I could see a situation arising where DH focuses on those alliances who are trying and engages them heavily with favorable odds (similar to how Argent and TDT were singled out for visits from Umbrella) while leaving those who aren't trying that hard for later.

 

I have to wonder what impact this might have on alliances that are fighting well out of professionalism as opposed to any hatred of Umbrella/Doomhouse/etc.  They have to know they're on the short list for a visit from Doomhouse or Non Grata and may be wondering if it is worth losing everything above 80k for the cause.  The numbers are clearly there for EQ in the lower ranges, but it really does seem like some alliances are doing the heavy lifting.  With the cost to destroy a Doomhouse nuke turret those alliances are going to start feeling the stress soon and other EQ nations need to show they can also do heavy lifting when the time comes.  

 

For EQ, aside from killing off nuke turrets and hopefully doing it in an efficient fashion, the big thing is going to be firmly setting the lower limit of the large nation safe zone that DH is creating.  EQ has a lot of nations in that range and with coordination and cooperation they can resist down declares, launch organized strikes upwards to grab who and what they can, or help with some of the larger nuke turrets.  

 

Beside political will, I also have to admit I'm interest in the morale aspect.  For the DH side, while some of those guys below 70k are getting pounded, they're still getting to see things like o ya baby's war reports, CubaQuerida's nukes of doom, etc.  On the EQ side, some alliances might be doing some damage in the under 60k shark tank, but they also just saw NG or Umbrella roll into town and destroy everything they had above 90k.  Sure the coalition still has lots of people above 90k, but their alliance no longer does.  Much has been made of how frustrating it is to be a turtling nuke turret, but I wonder how frustrating it is to find yourself trade nukes with someone who has more tech while your big boys are being picked off.  

 

End of the day of course this is all speculation.  I think in another week to ten days it will be interesting to see what is happening in the 80k to 100k range and who is paying what price there.  

Edited February 19, 2013 by Vasily Blyukher

[SoADarthCyfe6]

No one really cares about Umbrella anymore. Now the war is about Doomhouse inflicting as much damage upon Duckroll as possible. And, perhaps even more important, the destruction of CnG.

CnG will not be destroyed in this war. You fail to realize that you are the fodder of DR/NPO's side used to keep us at bay, while they do their pickings to DH. They do not care about you and they never will. In fact, NPO has quite a few friends over in CnG if you recall and they certainly did not want to see the crap pile jump on them either. Yet you did it anyways and pissed them off. Once the DR-DH front finishes, the CnG/TOP fronts won't be far behind. Even if you attempted to keep us at war, I would not be surprised if the rest of EQ forces you guys to peace out. This is just the reality of the situation and it will continue to be so.

Not only that, we seem to be handling you all just fine, as we always have and will.

Then I'm sure you'll have no problem if people from our side go rogue too.

Not really. While you will gain the advantage in the shark tank range, we still will have the ability to grow, and deal with rogues if necessary. There is a certain point to which the theory of "this particular group of nations can't do anything to us because we dominate the range of XX-XX ns" starts to fall apart. While the Competence Coalition owns the upper tiers, they have no where to go but down, and when they go down they have the most money and tech that goes with them. If they go rogue, they can obliterate anything in their path because EQ no longer has the "correct" firepower to deal with them. It vanished in this war with the destruction of their upper tier.

However, while EQ will own the Shark Tank range of "XX-XX ns", it is composed of 46 different alliances and not just a few nations as EQ likes to mention the 1%. While our mid-tiers will be in pain for some time, it's much easier to grow into the mid-tier then it is upper-tier. We will be able to effectively handle any rogue situation because you won't be able to obtain a strategic advantage over that tier unless you hold all 46 alliances over us for the rest of time. On top of that, once we establish what EQ's shark tank is, below that Shark Tank will then become another tier for the Competence Coalition to claim victory in, just as every other war which results in one sides victory, their lower tiers end up getting smashed because of all of the zombie and ZI'd nations who can obliterate all of the lower tier nations. In reality, Competence Coalition will be able to claim victory in two of the three major tier categories, while EQ claims just one.

What is going to determine the true end game of this war is how many nations (meaning the ratio comparison) will actually fall into each of those categories.

[Aeros]

The really problematic thing for EQ as I see it the war of attrition going on down in the lower tiers and the number of EQ nations it is taking to swarm over DH nuke turrets.  That is limiting the forces available for upward declares and making the large nation shorter that much worse for EQ.  EQ definitely needs to make some progress here and really maul some of those turrets. 

 

Political will of course plays a major role in deciding most wars.  Right now though it seems to be reaching a point for EQ where the political will is about to become a larger issue.  The war is reaching a point where soon DH will have the forces to down declare if they desire and start clearing out everyone above 80k (a 110k NS nation can hit strike down to 83k).  While EQ has superior numbers in the 80k to 90k range on paper, there are some alliances who are trying a lot harder than others.  I could see a situation arising where DH focuses on those alliances who are trying and engages them heavily with favorable odds (similar to how Argent and TDT were singled out for visits from Umbrella) while leaving those who aren't trying that hard for later.

 

This is pure wishful thinking. You must be higher then a kite if you think NPO/DR does not have political will, and since we're the major focus of the war, just how pray tell do you plan on breaking the will of Aft/XX/SF et al? FFS, many of them are gaining ranks in the Sanction Race, not losing it. DH put all their eggs in one basket for the most part and tried to roll Ai. At the peak we were around 400 active wars, now down in the mid 100's at this point. 

So, how exactly do you plan on breaking the political will? 

Edited February 19, 2013 by Aeros

[CubaQuerida]

Personally, I would settle for an admission that using Ai as a shooting range for bored Umbrella members is actually a really bad idea :P

 

Isn't this pretty much what Umbrella is doing currently?

[bhane]

Is this the root of Umbrella's hatred of NPO?  Viceroys and forced disbandment?  NPO has not done this since I became a member close to 4 years now.

 

You need new material or you need to get out of that cocoon you have been living in.

 

You're the ones that attacked us.  You are the ones acting on old grudges.  How about you come up with some better material than "umbrella are being dicks to us"?  

[D34th]

snip

 

Can you please also collect the statistics regarding number of nukes of this nations that you're tracking? I believe it's a very important point since to the "nuke turrets" strategy be valid those nations need nukes and this is a commodity who is running low on those nations after one month of war.