Give me a minute, I'm thinking.

[hartfw]

For those interested in facts:

 

Here is the list of nations and infra for the Specify other versus Mume side fo this war:

 

Specify Other  /  Mume

18 nations total have attacked 18 Mume Nations

Average Infra at time fo declare:  SO 1283.88  Mume 1381.08

Nations above 1500: SO 3  Mume 1 

Nations at 1499.99: SO 3 Mume  7

Nations at 1399: SO 1 Mume 4

Nations at 1299: SO 4 Mume 2

Nations at 1199: So 1 Mume 2

Nations at 1149: So 0 Mume 1

Nations at 1100/1099: So 2 Mume 1

Nations at 1049: So 1 Mume 0

Nations at 999: So 1 Mume 0

Nations at 899: So 1 Mume 0

Nations at 800: So 1 Mume 0

 

 

If AFt views it as a down declare, I can look and see if they have a legitimate gripe.  But based upon infra, and nations involved, I find it funny that Mume who had the highest ANS of any alliance and ~100 more infra on average then the equal number of nations attacking then --  out numbering SO at 1499+ by 8 to 6 and at 1399+ by 12 to 7 (they were outnumbered above 1499 3 to 1 tobe fair) are saying it was a down declare.

 

If nukes were being used to clobber an unready victim I could understand pointing to that as an unfair advantage, it would be. But right now it is 18 nations not firing nukes against 18 nations that for whatever reason felt it was prudent to buy more infra in general and not buy any military or start swapping in gc's.

 

The only way on those stats this side of the war looks like a down declare is that Mume wasn't given a warning.

Edited June 28, 2013 by hartfw

[Sarkin]

 The only way on those stats this side of the war looks like a down declare is that Mume wasn't given a warning.

 

And oddly enough, warnings are generally not sent to targets before war breaks out.

 

Let's be frank: the attacking alliance will always have an advantage over the defending alliance. That is not "unfair;" that is reality. However, the question of how great that advantage is depends entirely on two things: the coordination/preparation of the attackers for their blitz, and the activity/preparation of the defenders for their defense. 

 

Specify Other was generally well-prepared and we coordinated our blitz effectively. Mume was generally unprepared and they only had a couple of nations who bothered to be around for update. That's why, in Inst's words, this ended up resembling a "tech raid" more than the brawl we expected.

Edited June 28, 2013 by Sarkin

[Instr]

At the time of targeting, you could see perfectly well what the likely outcome of the attack would be. You saw that most of the defending nations generally lacked significant ground defenses, and would have been easily sent into anarchy within the first update of the war. You also selected targets that both individually and combined had less NS than you did, with your alliance holding 180,000 NS to 160,000 NS, and you selected targets that combined had infra parity, which would quickly degenerate into infra inferiority upon a successful blitz.

As far as the infra-based tiered nations front goes; your alliance is about twice our size and has a far wider distribution than our alliance. We have both have actives, semi-actives, newbs, and people who just can't play, but whereas in your alliance they're concentrated below 1k infra and more thus more likely to engage the Aftermath front, ours are bearing the full brunt of your attack, who are mainly composed by elites.

When you say that Aftermath is "bearing up better" than we are "due to higher military preparedness", with less anarchies, the thing is, most of your pre-update attacks were focused on our alliance instead of Aftermath. 24 attacks were targeted at Mume, while 13 attacks were targeted at Aftermath. One can construe this as your alliance choosing to focus Mume and drag Aftermath along to inflate NS,

[hartfw]

At the time of targeting, you could see perfectly well what the likely outcome of the attack would be. You saw that most of the defending nations generally lacked significant ground defenses, and would have been easily sent into anarchy within the first update of the war. You also selected targets that both individually and combined had less NS than you did, with your alliance holding 180,000 NS to 160,000 NS, and you selected targets that combined had infra parity, which would quickly degenerate into infra inferiority upon a successful blitz.

As far as the infra-based tiered nations front goes; your alliance is about twice our size and has a far wider distribution than our alliance. We have both have actives, semi-actives, newbs, and people who just can't play, but whereas in your alliance they're concentrated below 1k infra and more thus more likely to engage the Aftermath front, ours are bearing the full brunt of your attack, who are mainly composed by elites.

When you say that Aftermath is "bearing up better" than we are "due to higher military preparedness", with less anarchies, the thing is, most of your pre-update attacks were focused on our alliance instead of Aftermath. 24 attacks were targeted at Mume, while 13 attacks were targeted at Aftermath. One can construe this as your alliance choosing to focus Mume and drag Aftermath along to inflate NS,

 

I'm impressed Mume had 12 nations above 1399 infra and all 18 above 1099 if they have that high a proportion of inactives.  Maybe its just a build thing, but we didn't have that many with that much infra, despite our activity.

[KingBilly1]

Warchest... That is all :P

[Instr]

With a proper build protocol, you should either have 899 or 999 infra by the first day, and 1499.99 by the 7th or 9th day. I spend considerable effort micromanaging and delegating build responsibilities to other people, but that doesn't mean everyone can be on at update to check for war.

Specify Other also spent a considerable amount of time raiding people; we did manage raids on cash farms (low NS nations that bought soldiers; see Einer's report on us), a tactic copied from RE (who we believe WAS actually colluding), but raids against conventional nations, due to the need for higher soldier counts, GCs, and the risk of backfires (see Dancing Queen), can quickly compromise growth.

[bombuator]

 
Do something about it.

We will.

Inst seriously going for peace though? This ain't Cath's DoW on Hellas last round where they lead in every category, and I didn't even start the peace negotiations. Leaving Aftermath out to the dogs?

[Instr]

bombuator, meeting has already been scheduled with aftermath.

[Overlord Shinnra]

At the time of targeting, you could see perfectly well what the likely outcome of the attack would be. You saw that most of the defending nations generally lacked significant ground defenses, and would have been easily sent into anarchy within the first update of the war. You also selected targets that both individually and combined had less NS than you did, with your alliance holding 180,000 NS to 160,000 NS, and you selected targets that combined had infra parity, which would quickly degenerate into infra inferiority upon a successful blitz.

As far as the infra-based tiered nations front goes; your alliance is about twice our size and has a far wider distribution than our alliance. We have both have actives, semi-actives, newbs, and people who just can't play, but whereas in your alliance they're concentrated below 1k infra and more thus more likely to engage the Aftermath front, ours are bearing the full brunt of your attack, who are mainly composed by elites.

When you say that Aftermath is "bearing up better" than we are "due to higher military preparedness", with less anarchies, the thing is, most of your pre-update attacks were focused on our alliance instead of Aftermath. 24 attacks were targeted at Mume, while 13 attacks were targeted at Aftermath. One can construe this as your alliance choosing to focus Mume and drag Aftermath along to inflate NS,

 

 

Some of this doesn't seem like SO's problem. :o

[Overlord Shinnra]

With a proper build protocol, you should either have 899 or 999 infra by the first day, and 1499.99 by the 7th or 9th day. I spend considerable effort micromanaging and delegating build responsibilities to other people, but that doesn't mean everyone can be on at update to check for war.

Specify Other also spent a considerable amount of time raiding people; we did manage raids on cash farms (low NS nations that bought soldiers; see Einer's report on us), a tactic copied from RE (who we believe WAS actually colluding), but raids against conventional nations, due to the need for higher soldier counts, GCs, and the risk of backfires (see Dancing Queen), can quickly compromise growth.

 

Obviously your build wasn't optimal if your paying for it right now. 

[Piejonk]

We will.

 

I'm looking forward to this!

[Alfonse]

I spend considerable effort micromanaging and delegating build responsibilities to other people, but that doesn't mean everyone can be on at update to check for war.

 
Perhaps you should have dedicated some of that effort towards military upkeep.

[paul711]

 
Obviously your build wasn't optimal if your paying for it right now. 

Finally someone who gets it.

[KingBilly1]

Finally someone who gets it.

Sorry.... Did you not make a big fuss about wars last round? And the round before and before and before.

Let them have a moment of moaning, I think they deserve it

[paul711]

Sorry.... Did you not make a big fuss about wars last round? And the round before and before and before.

Let them have a moment of moaning, I think they deserve it

Last rd is the point. Everyone remembers it but not everyone learned from it. Look at OP now we have 82 GCs because we learned not to sit around early naked and expect a bye.

[Overlord Shinnra]

Sorry.... Did you not make a big fuss about wars last round? And the round before and before and before.

Let them have a moment of moaning, I think they deserve it

 

When did you all of a sudden become a sympathizer? You were the exact opposite of this last round. In any case. Some wars have a legitimate gripe because of huge disparities in numbers. Given that SO has said they aren't using nukes this war isn't anywhere near as bad as many of them last round in pure numbers (NS, Avg. NS, members, etc.).

 

The only two gripes I see being thrown around are that Mume didn't build well enough comparative to their enemy (which is self-inflicted) and that they were grouped with another alliance so its harder to coordinate (If people did not group alliances together, it would be very difficult to declare any wars because alliances don't match up well often times).

 

So I don't see anything that merits significant crying over.

[Fox Fire]

NVMND

Edited June 29, 2013 by Fox Fire

[KingBilly1]

Damn it.... I grew a heart!

[Sarkin]

Damn it.... I grew a heart!

 

That's not a heart, that's a liability. Can't be soft in TE.

[KingBilly1]

 
That's not a heart, that's a liability. Can't be soft in TE.

With loyalty comes strength

[Sarkin]

With loyalty comes strength

 

True, albeit completely irrelevant to what I said.

[KingBilly1]

Me, soft? You drunk? Lol!

Some deserve the kindness and others do not.... For the time being no one has pressed the right buttons, yet.

[Liltrekkie]

Lol, so all you are is doing is a massive alliance tech raid to avoid war. Smart.

[Auctor]

Yes, we are declaring wars to avoid fighting wars. Truly brilliant insight coming from the greatest minds TE has to offer.

[Alfonse]

Dear Inst,

Your performance in this war has astounded us here at Specify Other Film Productions.  With this in mind, we would like to offer you the role of one of the four baby turtles in our upcoming production of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 2: Cowabunga Down Under.  Please extend this offer to others within your alliance - such natural talent is in short supply these days!

Regards,

Alfonse B. Daniels
Head Janitor