Upper Tier Tracking Thread

[hartfw]

I'm not trying to argue with you, I don't see more options out of win/lose/stalemate and Auctor's statement is rather vague. But I am curious to hear what Auctor has to say about more options. Although, you may be correct, Astramora. Here is my opinion below:

 

The definition of a stalemate is a situation in which two opposing forces find that further action is impossible or futile; deadlock. The EQ coalition cannot further its actions above 80k NS where the Competency Coalition controls; meanwhile, the Competency Coalition is being overwhelmed (specifically below the 80k NS) by sheer masses from the EQ coalition. So, to me, no matter how long this drags out, this war won't change much at all, that's why it's a stalemate; needless to say, it is not the same as the "perfect" stalemate, it's where both sides cannot make a decisive move that would change the course of the war, that's the key part.

 

There's a flaw with your continuum, Astramora. How do we determine who is winning this war in terms of percentage? The EQ because of its numerical superiority? Or Competency Coalition because of its ability to control the front above 80k NS? How do we translate the winning percentage? Only history will judge that. The victory, in this case, will always be debatable, regardless of the outcome, unfortunately.

 

If the argument is that there is some tier that neither side can touch successfully == stalemate then it would be had not to fall loosely into something like that.  But saying it starts at 80k ignores the actual statistics being reported in this thread, and the experience of the front your on.  Maybe it was a typo?

[Lord Hershey]

If the argument is that there is some tier that neither side can touch successfully == stalemate then it would be had not to fall loosely into something like that.  But saying it starts at 80k ignores the actual statistics being reported in this thread, and the experience of the front your on.  Maybe it was a typo?

Was it at 80k or more? I can't remember. There's definitely some line around that 80k between two coalitions, lol. 

 

On the unrelated note, keep up the good work, OverlordShinnra, much appreciated with your efforts in this thread.

[CubaQuerida]

Definitely. I'm already pro-DH beat down again 3-6 months postwar. The knockout will come in time.

Just stop. You had one shot to knock DH out and fell on your face. If you think a rematch is gonna be in your favor, you have not been paying attention to anything in this thread (which is totally believable).

[Holy Empire of Halin]

Please, continue trying to make me look bad ooc for some reason by talking about what some other coj member did in-game. You're really winning the pr war here.

I am sorry but isnt your whole shtick is pointing out what people did ingame and how that action effects us here? 

[renegade4box]

I think a lot of the EQ mid tier players aren't appreciating just how big their losses are in the upper tier. For some of their players, 1 round of war is literally destroying a year's worth of progress. Whereas for many of our upper tier, the amount of tech they are stealing combined with our tech replenishment efforts means they are taking no real damage. Some of your guys whom have been staggered 4-5 times have had an amount of tech destroyed that will take 2+ years to replace. They will never again be a top nation. 

[Aeternos Astramora]

I think a lot of the EQ mid tier players aren't appreciating just how big their losses are in the upper tier. For some of their players, 1 round of war is literally destroying a year's worth of progress. Whereas for many of our upper tier, the amount of tech they are stealing combined with our tech replenishment efforts means they are taking no real damage. Some of your guys whom have been staggered 4-5 times have had an amount of tech destroyed that will take 2+ years to replace. They will never again be a top nation. 

 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AuOBgJ-MOr7rdEtOdFNadGp6bHI1bHR3NGR4amR3YWc&single=true&gid=0&output=html

 

That looks pretty severe to me too.

[Dochartaigh]

I think a lot of the EQ mid tier players aren't appreciating just how big their losses are in the upper tier. For some of their players, 1 round of war is literally destroying a year's worth of progress. Whereas for many of our upper tier, the amount of tech they are stealing combined with our tech replenishment efforts means they are taking no real damage. Some of your guys whom have been staggered 4-5 times have had an amount of tech destroyed that will take 2+ years to replace. They will never again be a top nation. 

 

Do you not see how much tech your side has lost? Sure a few nations may be replenishing tech but most are not.

[renegade4box]

 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AuOBgJ-MOr7rdEtOdFNadGp6bHI1bHR3NGR4amR3YWc&single=true&gid=0&output=html

 

That looks pretty severe to me too.

While I'm not particularly following TOP, some of the worst losers on there took a beating of 6k tech over 7 weeks of war. Some of your worst losing nations lost 4k in 1 week. Surely you can see the difference? 

 

I've been following MK's top nations, and in the past 3 weeks we've had an equal amount of nations gain tech as we have had lose tech. If you compare that to our opponents the net tech damage/received after accounting for replenishment and tech stolen, the ratio is something greater than 8-1. 

[Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz]

Definitely. I'm already pro-DH beat down again 3-6 months postwar. The knockout will come in time.

 

Why bother? We can just keep fighting - perhaps your top nations will enjoy another 3-6 months of peace mode, eh?

[Yevgeni Luchenkov]

 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AuOBgJ-MOr7rdEtOdFNadGp6bHI1bHR3NGR4amR3YWc&single=true&gid=0&output=html

 

That looks pretty severe to me too.

Our worst losses are a year of tech (6k). We'll live. They're heavy, though, it was by no means easy fighting. We fought good nations all the way. I think he's more refering to people who lost 10-12k tech.

[renegade4box]

Our worst losses are a year of tech (6k). We'll live. They're heavy, though, it was by no means easy fighting. We fought good nations all the way. I think he's more refering to people who lost 10-12k tech.

 

I believe Matt Miller and Odin's Layer both lost >12k. I think our side's biggest weekly losses now are just below 1k, whereas we are still facing some nations and doing 3500 in one week. At the end of this, EQ is literally going to have no active players left in their top tier. 

[CubaQuerida]

Our worst losses are a year of tech (6k). We'll live. They're heavy, though, it was by no means easy fighting. We fought good nations all the way. I think he's more refering to people who lost 10-12k tech.

 

Bubbler Nation comes to mind.  He was a worthy opponent when we traded nukes at 25k tech, but will not be so anytime in the foreseeable future.  You can gloss over impacts like this if you like, but he sure would be a handy nation to have if you ever wanted to say, start a war versus a high-tech'd, well coordinated bloc.

[Steve Buscemi]

Definitely. I'm already pro-DH beat down again 3-6 months postwar. The knockout will come in time.

 

The hilarity of your post is the people that actually took on DH were DR and NPOsphere, not your sorry mega-inactive Derp Rush block of alliances who needed
20+ to take on just ODN/Int.  You should thank your lucky stars that DR/NPO had the balls to do a job that you couldn't ever do and even post-war wouldn't be able to do.

 

You will always be just a DR meatshield and the second you get too prideful and throw off the shackles, you'll be promptly put in your place.

 

[Enamel32]

The hilarity of your post is the people that actually took on DH were DR and NPOsphere, not your sorry mega-inactive Derp Rush block of alliances who needed
20+ to take on just ODN/Int.  You should thank your lucky stars that DR/NPO had the balls to do a job that you couldn't ever do and even post-war wouldn't be able to do.

 

You will always be just a DR meatshield and the second you get too prideful and throw off the shackles, you'll be promptly put in your place.

 

Lol, u mad? U seem, mad.

 

DH rolled us twice over because they wanted to make XX/SF statistically insignificant. They used MJ to do so, and they succeeded. I'm not sure what to tell you beyond that. As I predicted months ago, DR is paying for their past actions now, because XX/SF don't have the numbers to do any fighting where the battles really matter, which is what MJ/DH/PF wanted in the first place over a year ago. XX/SF can't be blamed for that.

 

As for your last remark, yep, we are meatshielding for DR right now. I'm a fucking proud-ass meatshield if it means you cunts get to bite the dust. It's end game.  The only reason my nation still exists is because of my conviction to see DH and certain allies down and out for the count.

Edited March 10, 2013 by Enamel32

[ROMMELHSQ]

Lol, u mad? U seem, mad.

 

DH rolled us twice over because they wanted to make XX/SF statistically insignificant. They used MJ to do so, and they succeeded. I'm not sure what to tell you beyond that. As I predicted months ago, DR is paying for their past actions now, because XX/SF don't have the numbers to do any fighting where the battles really matter, which is what MJ/DH/PF wanted in the first place over a year ago. XX/SF can't be blamed for that.

Glad we all know where the the battles really matter.

[Lurunin]

Glad we all know where the the battles really matter.

The upper tier are where all the tech laden nations reside. In order to bring their alliance to a less militarily dangerous one, that tech needs destroyed. Meaning that the upper tier and upper mid tier are the most important to accomplish this. Especially to bring them down in range where number superiority takes over

[hartfw]

Our worst losses are a year of tech (6k). We'll live. They're heavy, though, it was by no means easy fighting. We fought good nations all the way. I think he's more refering to people who lost 10-12k tech.

 

This is inaccurate. Looking at the 30 TOP nations that started above 10k tech for instance, and ignoring the 2 that deleted, the 1 in pm the entire war, and the one that joined the war a month late, you will find that the average loss was a touch over 6k tech (higher if you exclude tech buys).

 

Of those 26, 24 are aove 5k in tech losses (with one of those 2 only due to a historic buying spree, over half are above that 6k in loses, and 1 tops above 8.5k in tech loses.  Still definitely none in the 10k range unless you count the deletions.

 

Maybe TOP and that front is a complete anomaly, but with 73% of TOP's nations above 10k tech no longer there and only 3 above 12.5k, it looks like it is time to start separating out the concept of 'upper tier' and the 'super tier' or 'god tier',  As it is -- at least based upon this front -- the concept of upper tier might not just describe fewer nations, but also might be much closer to what used to be mid tier in terms of tech stockpiles.

[Enamel32]

Glad we all know where the the battles really matter.

EDIT: Oh I apologize if I wasn't clear. I meant Upper tier is where wars really matter.

 

And there should be no confusion, of course that's where wars really matter. Do I think you're coalition has a chance? No. The problem is these nations have just gotten too big evading war, picking on the absolute most vulnerable targets, or doing what have you.

 

Imagine a baseball team of all pitchers. You might be able to strike out many of my guys, but they can't hit and they can't field. That doesn't change the fact that the pitcher is probably the most important position on the team.

 

It's already showing that ultra high NS nations aren't really carrying much weight. They're just sitting around while any below ~75K ns is in perpetual war.

Edited March 10, 2013 by Enamel32

[CubaQuerida]

E

 

It's already showing that ultra high NS nations aren't really carrying much weight. They're just sitting around while any below ~75K ns is in perpetual war.

 

Went ahead and tallied up my wars (had to interpolate a bit since a few were deleted/not registered) and I've done a collective 425k NS damage to my opponents.  That's more than certain entire AA's out there.  Just because I finished my task before the "shark tank (lol)" could kill my AA-mates doesn't mean I've not done some heavy lifting.  Quite the contrary sir, we've actually statistically eliminated the entire enemy super tier, and most of its remaining upper tier, thereby securing our own security for the next, I dunno, 3 years?

[Enamel32]

Went ahead and tallied up my wars (had to interpolate a bit since a few were deleted/not registered) and I've done a collective 425k NS damage to my opponents.  That's more than certain entire AA's out there.  Just because I finished my task before the "shark tank (lol)" could kill my AA-mates doesn't mean I've not done some heavy lifting.  Quite the contrary sir, we've actually statistically eliminated the entire enemy super tier, and most of its remaining upper tier, thereby securing our own security for the next, I dunno, 3 years?

That's an interesting statistic. I saw you fought tronix. I'm not worried though. CnG and smaller members in your alliance will be ground to a pulp, while the 100 members of your coalition's upper tier are "securing your own safety".

Edited March 10, 2013 by Enamel32

[OverlordShinnra]

These statistics have been accrued over the last 3 days. Events occur in real time...

 

 

Totals for the Original Front

 

 

DR and co.

  120k+ - 9 (0) --> 9 (0)

  100k -  10 (1) --> 10 (1)

  80k -   69 (37) --> 68 (37)

 

DH and co.

  120k+ -  20 (15) --> 21 (14)

  100k -   9 (3) --> 8 (3)

  80k -    10 (6) --> 10 (6)

 

 

Commentary

Pretty much no movement on this front. It gets pretty boring after a while to watch nothing happen. When nothing happens in the top tier it is advantage Equlibrium for what is happening below.

 

 

 

Totals for Front 1

 

 

Aztec and co.

  120k+ -  7 (0) --> 7 (0)

  100k -   5 (0) --> 5 (0)

  80k -    25 (13) --> 23 (11)

 

TOP and co.

  120k+ -  4 (2) --> 4 (2)

  100k -   1 (1) --> 1 (1)

  80k -    7 (3) --> 7 (3)

 

 

Commentary

More losses for Aztec and co. while the other side stays the same. I don't imagine we are going to see this wrapped up anytime soon because you can only get so many wars out in a proper nuke cycle. We are talking maybe 9 wars involving the same nations from TOP and co. over and over. We will see if there is any movement in the coming days.

 

 

 

Totals for Front 2

 

 

SF/XX/Aftermath and co.

  120k+ -  10 (0) --> 10 (0)

  100k -   16 (1) --> 15 (1)

  80k -    64 (29) --> 63 (26)

 

CnG and Co.

  120k+ -  33 (22) --> 33 (22)

  100k+ -  27 (16) --> 21 (12)

  80k -    40 (10) --> 43 (19)

 

 

Commentary

There was a sizeable drop in the 100k tier from CnG and co. with most of that coming from House Baratheon. While some of these nations land in the 80k range, some of them have just plain disappeared (one of them with the UCoN surrender). This is clearly advantage SF/XX/Aftermath for the day and we are back to square 1 again. In other news we have another 100k+ nation out into war mode with The Legion's own HockeyD13. We will see if he fares any better then the others, my guess is no.

 

 

 

Totals for the Entire War

 

 Equilibrium

  120k+ -  26 (0) --> 26 (0)

  100k -   31 (2) --> 30 (2)

  80k -    158 (79) --> 154 (74)

 

Competence

  120k+ - 57 (39) --> 58 (38)

  100k -  37 (20) --> 30 (16)

  80k -   57 (19) --> 60 (28)

 

 

 

 

Special Notes

- UCoN has been taken out due to surrender (taking with them 1, 100k tier nation)

- FARK has been cleared out for the second time this war. 

- An adjustment was made for the last update due to miscount to the tune of 2-100k nations for the SF/XX/Aftermath and co. 

 

[Enamel32]

Thanks for the stats OS. They are very interesting. :)

[Caliph]

That's an interesting statistic. I saw you fought tronix. I'm not worried though. CnG and smaller members in your alliance will be ground to a pulp, while the 100 members of your coalition's upper tier are "securing your own safety".

It is much easier to rebuild a lower and middle tier than an upper tier.  It takes time to rebuild, and through the destruction we've caused to your upper tier we have set nations back years in building.

 

You have done the same to us, no doubt.  But we will rule the upper tier and you everything below that threshold. 

[Enamel32]

It is much easier to rebuild a lower and middle tier than an upper tier.  It takes time to rebuild, and through the destruction we've caused to your upper tier we have set nations back years in building.

 

You have done the same to us, no doubt.  But we will rule the upper tier and you everything below that threshold. 

You assume that your nations have the gut to keep fighting a perpetually losing battle. FAN did it. Maybe you can too. But remember, FAN was never really the same after that, either.

 

EDIT: besides, 1 nuke alone can do more damage than 18Mil for even tiny nations. Aid is a futile life support effort.

Edited March 10, 2013 by Enamel32

[Caliph]

You assume that your nations have the gut to keep fighting a perpetually losing battle. FAN did it. Maybe you can too. But remember, FAN was never really the same after that, either.

 

EDIT: besides, 1 nuke alone can do more damage than 18Mil for even tiny nations. Aid is a futile life support effort.

This war won't last forever, nobody wants that.  But we still have some fight left in us, and we are making this war as painful for you as possible.  We may lose, but in the meantime we are decimating your upper tiers.  Like I said, we can rebuild our lower and middle tiers a lot easier than you can rebuild your upper tiers.

 

And we have seen enough people on your side wanting to roll us again in a few months, so why in the blue hells would we try to get out of this war while you still have some sort of upper tier?  It doesn't make sense for us to bow out while leaving you in a position to directly threaten us again in a few months, which is what you have stated you plan on doing.

Edited March 10, 2013 by Caliph