Upper End of the War

[Vladimir Stukov II]

It makes perfect sense to me to keep you and your allies on the ropes as long as it takes to force a resolution suitably favourable to the aggrieved party, AI. The longer this takes the better. A year? Short time, my friend, short time. A year is nothing. If you arent ready to drag this out twice that long you might as well just surrender now and throw yourselves on the mercy of TronIX.

 

No one cares about collecting taxes and growing steadily when they could be nuking bad guys instead and that is just a fact.

 

You are delusional if you think Equilibrium can stay together for even close to a year. You guys are about to fall apart after a few weeks. :laugh:

[the rebel]

You are delusional if you think Equilibrium can stay together for even close to a year. You guys are about to fall apart after a few weeks. :laugh:

 

So when we get to week 7+  you become delusional?

[scytale]

Is it still possible to bring back the war strategy discussion or do we now declare this thread clinically dead?

So sad to see this degenerate like every other thread but this one had a good run.  The trolls on both sides are just too powerful.  Maybe we should make a coalition on non-troll players.  ;)

[Daimos]

Sounds magic to me bonny lad; its not like this "game" is any good.

 

These kind of remarks annoys me.  Same with "This game is dieing".  Please stop.

 

This goes to both sides.

[Parandiac]

vasily, save us! you're the only one capable of looking up stats on different alliances or specific nations! what is this magical tool you seem to use that holds power over the peasants in this thread that would rather bicker about who killed who?

 

most of you should hail from alliances that hopefully were competent enough to collect pre-war stats on their alliance, and have been tracking that change. so instead of idly pondering what is going on, maybe be proactive and go bring that data here (barring your government going into sandy vagina mode for no reason) or do your own number crunching and people can select to start tracking certain alliances daily and then feed that data to vasily.

 

everyone butthurt about who started this war should grab a couple alliance info screens and start writing down numbers immediately.

[Banned]

Alright, well now that the cat is out of the bag.  Somebody, and I'm not naming any names here (but his initials are Joracy), from one of the CnG alliances *cough cough ODN cough* may have promised orange cake.  That is the big "CnG pre-war promises bit".  My friends and fellow inhabitants of the cyberverse, I am here to regrettably inform you, that the cake is a lie!

[OverlordShinnra]

Have to admit, the entrance of GDA makes things a bit bleaker for the DH side. Not that 7 higher infra nations make super nations scared but certainly every bit counts. 

[Manis B]

CnG promised GDA they could come in. PROVE ME WRONG!

[Gravitas]

Let's keep this on-topic and OOC. Further attempts to derail the thread or bring in IC feuds will result in full warnings.

[Namayan]

vasily, save us! you're the only one capable of looking up stats on different alliances or specific nations! what is this magical tool you seem to use that holds power over the peasants in this thread that would rather bicker about who killed who?

 

most of you should hail from alliances that hopefully were competent enough to collect pre-war stats on their alliance, and have been tracking that change. so instead of idly pondering what is going on, maybe be proactive and go bring that data here (barring your government going into sandy vagina mode for no reason) or do your own number crunching and people can select to start tracking certain alliances daily and then feed that data to vasily.

 

everyone butthurt about who started this war should grab a couple alliance info screens and start writing down numbers immediately.

 

 

Hi Para, nice to see you again. You have been busy going around CN from Europa into BFF and now INT.  Maybe another showdown between you and jrkee at the low tiers?

 

Well, I think stats will be bleak on this case.  From the way I see each side post their comment, one side pictures the whole statistics of the totality while the other side uses different statistics like from tier to tier, breakdown statistics, etc.

 

It is why each side is believing they are winning.

 

However, this thread is about the top tier war which has already been decided.  Maybe make 100K NS and below anaylsis?

[Parandiac]

Hi Para, nice to see you again. You have been busy going around CN from Europa into BFF and now INT.  Maybe another showdown between you and jrkee at the low tiers?

 

Well, I think stats will be bleak on this case.  From the way I see each side post their comment, one side pictures the whole statistics of the totality while the other side uses different statistics like from tier to tier, breakdown statistics, etc.

 

It is why each side is believing they are winning.

 

However, this thread is about the top tier war which has already been decided.  Maybe make 100K NS and below anaylsis?

eh, Europa->BFF was kind of an evolution. BFF->INT was chaos. i blame deebo, as the old Europan motto goes.

 

jrkee has been through a lot, it looks like. he's still following my nation building plan though, so i'm glad that's working out for him. pretty gradual decline as well so his rebuild will be swift, considering his warchest is probably still in line with mine. we probably won't fight at all, but i might go barreling through a couple other people in MCXA. it's kind of a tradition now.

 

you can look at the big picture and think you really see what is going on, but reality is, there are little things happening that upset that big picture every now and again. it's happened before. when masses of nations steal defeat out of the jaws of victory, as i've seen done in many wars being fought against INT nations, it begs the question of just what are sheer numbers worth if they can't fight a war worth a damn? so yeah- big picture, it might look bleak because of numbers and NS comparisons.

 

but active wars, active aid slots, NS drop comparison ratio between infra and tech... these are the actual meat of things, and the only real thing that has been happening in here has been "well the NS drop of blah blah blah" across dozens of alliances without actual breakdown of anything. there is a lot of conjecture, but if vasily is the only one fetching stats, it's a mountain of information for one person to handle. everyone posting in this thread that continues to ask for updated information could have offered to gather data and log it in an excel sheet and forward it to vasily so he could add his input about what it means.

 

or i could start doing it tomorrow for several alliances. valentine's day being what it is, my woman has certain expectations about tonight, so today is shot.

 

i'll build some stuff in excel and try to cook something up this weekend.

[Tiggah]

With regards to surrendering, I think both sides are a bit out to lunch.

The last couple wars have resulted in our lower-mid tier getting pounded. This is pretty much par for the course and we've never had morale issues in the past. Sure, some upper-mid tier guys and higher tier guys have been added to the mix, but the difference is maybe 20% of our alliance at best and the thinking is flawed. It used to be that the lower tier was filled with newbs who when shocked by the fragility of their nation jumped ship in droves. We've seen slow growth in the CN world as a whole and now a large percentage of the lower tier is populated by re-rolls and lazy cheesedragons. I took all my significant damage in the first week. Some nations may last a couple before ending up in the same place. Once we're here, where is the incentive to surrender? So we can start rebuilding? A lot of us barely built to begin with. Its why we're down here... I also see talk about CnG and others not wanting to burn for Umbrella and we're supposedly upset over their top guys sitting in peace mode. We, in CnG, are more than aware that the derp rush was more about CnG than it was about Umbrella. GOONS no doubt sees it the same way. You guys jumped us with such ridiculous force, there's really no other way to interpret it. It conceivably could've been a strategic move given the ODN's lack of outside ties and an attempt to weaken post-war allies of the NPO faction of your coalition, but Umbrella isn't loaded down with outside ties and if option B is your game, your coalition is hopeless in the long term.

From our side, I see talk about the upper tier nations getting pounded as reasoning for their withdrawal. The problem is their upper tier is the minority in their alliances. They've pointed this out in relation to us, but its even more true for them. Even if their upper tier wanted out, they'd be unlikely to get their way. The mid and lower tier is going to continue having a blast, so expecting pull-outs of any significant scale is pointless. Add to that, the amount of pride those upper tier would have to swallow in any surrender having trumpeted an easy victory from the beginning. Its also worth noting that surrender is really the only way out. Our side can't afford to sign a mutual withdrawal, so any move to leave the battlefield would be one-sided and essentially a surrender even if the terms didn't explicitly state that. The coalition as a whole isn't about to drop for the same reasons the upper tier isn't going to push surrender. The majority of alliances are enjoying this and even those that aren't will remain too stubborn to pull-out for a while yet.

Bottom line here is we're going to be here for a while, so pull up a chair, grab some popcorn and enjoy.

[steodonn]

neither of you seems to dispute the point you can only win at 100k+ range, everyone below that belongs to us, and in a war of attrition, we've got 3 times the numbers in the range that you do, i get to collect without being in nuclear anarchy, how many of your alliance mates below 100k can say the same?

 

Not being able to collect is a concern for another few months down the line 

[Ardus]

Let's keep this on-topic and OOC. Further attempts to derail the thread or bring in IC feuds will result in full warnings.

Please give warnings 6 to 8 weeks to arrive via post.

[D34th]

I take a break to enjoy the carnival and when I come back people destroyed the thread, shame on you people.

[berbers]

Edit: Posted before seeing warning

Edited February 15, 2013 by berbers

[Vhalen]

I take a break to enjoy the carnival and when I come back people destroyed the thread, shame on you people.

At least you have the sense not to act surprised.

[Parandiac]

With regards to surrendering, I think both sides are a bit out to lunch.

The last couple wars have resulted in our lower-mid tier getting pounded. This is pretty much par for the course and we've never had morale issues in the past. Sure, some upper-mid tier guys and higher tier guys have been added to the mix, but the difference is maybe 20% of our alliance at best and the thinking is flawed. It used to be that the lower tier was filled with newbs who when shocked by the fragility of their nation jumped ship in droves. We've seen slow growth in the CN world as a whole and now a large percentage of the lower tier is populated by re-rolls and lazy cheesedragons. I took all my significant damage in the first week. Some nations may last a couple before ending up in the same place. Once we're here, where is the incentive to surrender? So we can start rebuilding? A lot of us barely built to begin with. Its why we're down here... I also see talk about CnG and others not wanting to burn for Umbrella and we're supposedly upset over their top guys sitting in peace mode. We, in CnG, are more than aware that the derp rush was more about CnG than it was about Umbrella. GOONS no doubt sees it the same way. You guys jumped us with such ridiculous force, there's really no other way to interpret it. It conceivably could've been a strategic move given the ODN's lack of outside ties and an attempt to weaken post-war allies of the NPO faction of your coalition, but Umbrella isn't loaded down with outside ties and if option B is your game, your coalition is hopeless in the long term.

From our side, I see talk about the upper tier nations getting pounded as reasoning for their withdrawal. The problem is their upper tier is the minority in their alliances. They've pointed this out in relation to us, but its even more true for them. Even if their upper tier wanted out, they'd be unlikely to get their way. The mid and lower tier is going to continue having a blast, so expecting pull-outs of any significant scale is pointless. Add to that, the amount of pride those upper tier would have to swallow in any surrender having trumpeted an easy victory from the beginning. Its also worth noting that surrender is really the only way out. Our side can't afford to sign a mutual withdrawal, so any move to leave the battlefield would be one-sided and essentially a surrender even if the terms didn't explicitly state that. The coalition as a whole isn't about to drop for the same reasons the upper tier isn't going to push surrender. The majority of alliances are enjoying this and even those that aren't will remain too stubborn to pull-out for a while yet.

Bottom line here is we're going to be here for a while, so pull up a chair, grab some popcorn and enjoy.

 

truly this. our side is content with the curb stomp up high, while the other side is content to get knocked down into the mid tier and wreak havoc. it happened already, so now it's becoming a war of attrition. who is going to pull out first? with everyone content right now because they won a limited advantage on their own terms, kind of, all we're going to do is pummel the mid to low tiers until someone breaks from the boredom of rebuilding the lower guys through aid.

 

strategic peace mode and aidfalls will see where this ends up. as long as they are lazy and allow us to act like FAN did, then they are going to lave a long and cumbersome war on their hands.

[Fulgrim]

These kind of remarks annoys me.  Same with "This game is dieing".  Please stop.

 

This goes to both sides.

 

"I will rest when I die"

[HHAYD]

I take a break to enjoy the carnival and when I come back people destroyed the thread, shame on you people.

 

If you just noticed that CN Forums or politics wasn't a Mister Roger's Neighborhood, then you're in for a very severe disappointment...

[ddog241]

Not being able to collect is a concern for another few months down the line 

 

indeed that is the case.. well as long as nations have a good warchest....

[HHAYD]

indeed that is the case.. well as long as nations have a good warchest....

 

A simple soulution would be the grind down your opponent's warchest. Force him/her to rebuy infra if possible.

 

A nation with 13K of tech and less than 1K of infra is not going win any GAs anytime soon against balanced or infra heavy fighters. Worse if such tech heavy fighter depleted his nuke stockpile.

[Yevgeni Luchenkov]

A simple soulution would be the grind down your opponent's warchest. Force him/her to rebuy infra if possible.

 

A nation with 13K of tech and less than 1K of infra is not going win any GAs anytime soon against balanced or infra heavy fighters. Worse if such tech heavy fighter depleted his nuke stockpile.

You may be surprised by the power of tech. If his nuke lands - it should, given his tech advantage - he has a decent chance of winning his offensive GAs. He'll lose the defensive ones but, at that point, it goes without saying.

[Khyber]

Any news on when we will see the next set of stats?

 

I'm curious to see what it will look like.  I am off the opinion that at least 80k is the line, and it may go as low as 60k.  I only need to look at the alliances like AI and the ones GATO and NG hit to see what the trend is once the over 100k is claimed.  Mind you that depends on how long the war is going.

[Namayan]

Any news on when we will see the next set of stats?

 

I'm curious to see what it will look like.  I am off the opinion that at least 80k is the line, and it may go as low as 60k.  I only need to look at the alliances like AI and the ones GATO and NG hit to see what the trend is once the over 100k is claimed.  Mind you that depends on how long the war is going.

 

I based my conclusion on these statistics:

 

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/blog/811/entry-3683-stats-itb-4/

 

As of Feb 11, the stats shows Equilibrium superiority at the 100k-80k NS ranges.  DH has an advantage above 100K-150K NS ranges.  While DH also has total superiority at 150K+. While 80k-60K NS range seems to be tie.

 

I based this on the difference between the number of total losses from Feb 4 to Feb 11. As well as the information that Equilibrium has given up the 150K+ ranges.  Of course, this should change and I am excited to see the updated stats.