Jump to content

Over 1/3 of TOP has not yet fought this war

Hereno

By Hereno
in World Affairs (IC)

 Share

Recommended Posts

iamthey Apprentice

iamthey

Posted
Posted

You should know by now TOP has already moved on to the next war where half the suckers in their coaltion will be fighting on the the other side.  I do not blame them, so many of you idiots keep falling for it why should they stop.  Sign suprise treaty, get war rolling, peace it, pounce on weakened half of coalition next.  Rinse and repeat.


Outside of your vivid imagination, when has this ever actually happened?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 320
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Vespassianus Newbie

Vespassianus

Posted
Posted

To be fair TOP did good amount of damage, but i guess they prefer to put nations, who aren't used in a battle to peace mode. Maybe more of their nations could have been fighting, but still they completed their objectives and destroyed every high tier they fought. You can't really blame them for using the active, tech heavy, good warchest guys to fight.

 

NPO were fighting hard too, before the war they had like 35-40 guys over 100k ns, now they have 16, mostly hippies/bankers, so most of them high tier fought heavily. You can't say that they didn't put up a fight, especially if you see their damage input and output.

 

If you wanna make some criticism you should aim it to NPO's side strategy to let Umb/TOP take their alliances's high tiers one by one instead of putting up a concentrated effort or you could make fun of ODN's excessive peace mode usage or TLR's shitty performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link Gaetz Newbie

Link Gaetz

Posted
Posted

I. AM. SHOCKED.

 

I mean really, nobody seen this coming, it's not like someone repeatedly said over and over TOP would PM everything they could and fight only in the tiers they had a massive advantage in while letting their allies and coalition mates slag through the tiers where it was more even.

 

The only thing TOP did for the Polar coalition was make it so AA's that actually fight had a way to chain in.

This has been obvious for quite awhile for anyone paying attention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
the rebel Newbie

the rebel

Posted
Posted (edited)

I. AM. SHOCKED.

 

I'm even more shocked at a santioned alliance with allies under attack has yet to enter the global war and being one of the last non neutral alliances left outside of the war. Which is pathetic really.

Edited by the rebel
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hartfw Newbie

hartfw

Posted
Posted

Just to be clear, we are criticizing TOP for only using 2/3rds of their nations, and for pm'ing bad war chest / crappy fighter / lower ns nations?

 

There needs to be a topic on here for the ~dozen major alliances that all pm'ed more and decided their largest nations are all too precious to use, even if on the side of the larger upper tier.

 

 

I. AM. SHOCKED.

 

I mean really, nobody seen this coming, it's not like someone repeatedly said over and over TOP would PM everything they could and fight only in the tiers they had a massive advantage in while letting their allies and coalition mates slag through the tiers where it was more even.

 

The only thing TOP did for the Polar coalition was make it so AA's that actually fight had a way to chain in.

 

 

The pm everyone they could, only be a source of chains etc all looks wildly inaccurate when compared with how much most aa's contributed (but not all).

 

However, the fight only in the tiers they had a massive advantage in while letting their allies and coalition mates slag through the tiers where it is more competitive even has a degree of truth.

 

Problem is, when you look at that list of 34 nations and take a gander at who is actually in that range where most of the slagging is now, TOP has 

 

8.6k infra, 2.85k tech http://www.cybernati...ation_ID=504304 - Roman Federation is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/30/2013. 

8k infra 3k tech http://www.cybernati...ation_ID=388776 - The Royal Dominion is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/1/2013. 
6k infra 2.9k tech http://www.cybernati...ation_ID=405692 - Malinas is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013. 
10k infra 1.1k tech http://www.cybernati...ation_ID=382328 - Teutonica is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013. 
13k infra, 210 tech http://www.cybernati...Nation_ID=67253 - Republic of Valinor is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013. 
 
6.5k infra 1.4k tech http://www.cybernati...ation_ID=133454 - Murmurandia is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013. 
8k infra 734 tech http://www.cybernati...ation_ID=523620 - Vakadonia is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013. 
9k infra 350 tech http://www.cybernati...ation_ID=435010 - Khesed is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013. 
8.5k infra 0 tech http://www.cybernati...ation_ID=291285 - Outer Heaven is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013. 
7k infra 0 tech http://www.cybernati...ation_ID=164873 - Nation of Amestris is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/18/2013. 
 
5k infra 0 tech http://www.cybernati...Nation_ID=31177 - 3 Headed Monkey Land is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 11/1/2013. 
5.1k infra 100 tech http://www.cybernati...ation_ID=469512 - Nova Quintus is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013. 
5k infra 150 tech http://www.cybernati...ation_ID=486969 - CaffeinatedContinent is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/31/2013. 
5k infra 15 tech  http://www.cybernati...ation_ID=532647 - Gomorrah is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/30/2013. 

 

1.2k infra, 1.2k tech http://www.cybernati...ation_ID=206268 - Slapper Nation is a peaceful nation. War is not an option since 10/30/2013.

 

So, apart from 2-3 nations we are talking about massively bloated infra levels with close to no tech.  The type of nation that typically just generates money (and ideally outgoing tech) and is complete crap for fighting. Which isn't to say that they cannot help -- a stagger is a stagger is a stagger.

 

But the PM complaint about TOP in a nut shell is not that they didn't use the nations that have the most NS, the ones everyone else is hoarding and the ones that are hardest to build back up.  It basically just boils down to that they choose not to wreck all the infra of 15 or so nations with a bunch of expensive infra and zero tech.  Nations clearly not build for war and that will be more than halved in 1 round.

 

Which is funny that then in the same thread NPO's pm usage is defended for being banks.

 

 

That would be an over simplistic view on the NPO.

Of the top 50 NPO nations 92% of them are banks and I would not be one to throw banks out into a war, you need banks for rebuilding.

I don't want them sending bank nations out of peace mode to get pummeled so that would leave 4 NPO nations for war in the top 50.

 

 

These are nations with lots of tech, tech they keep adding to.  Wouldn't they be more effective as banks if they stopped bringing tech in?  And just sent money out? Why not just go with it is strategy, some day we hope to use these nations but the other side has more nations they might use up there so we don't want to lose it now.  As an explanation, it sounds considerably less hollow.

 

 

Also, since I had to defend TOP here, lets just all make fun of Loli.  Grew 2k infra and 0 tech since Eq.  Still cannot fight, I assume with a crap wc again.  There I almost feel better about the rest of my post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Farnsworth Newbie

Farnsworth

Posted
Posted

 

That would be an over simplistic view on the NPO.

Of the top 50 NPO nations 92% of them are banks and I would not be one to throw banks out into a war, you need banks for rebuilding.

I don't want them sending bank nations out of peace mode to get pummeled so that would leave 4 NPO nations for war in the top 50.

 

Despite being outnumbered the NPO is giving out a good fight.

I am not worried at all about any of their nations below 50k NS that are in PM at the moment.

NPO has done the most damage out of everyone in the war.  They're not shrinking from the fight like you guys are trying to narrate and any attempt to frame it that way is, quite frankly, silly.  Have fun with making that thread though, I'm sure it will go places.

I lol'd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
berbers Enthusiast

berbers

Posted
Posted

Hart, the problem is the rest of their coalition is using nations with bad infra:tech ratios to fight. He'll if every AA on the other side PM'd like TOP, our coalition would outnumber their war mode nations.

So if other people need to fight with all they have, how come TOP doesn't?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Auctor Newbie

Auctor

Posted
Posted

I'd be really surprised if "other people" are even capable of fighting with all they have. Who exactly are you referring to?

I'm no defender of TOP, but IRON members complaining that TOP isn't fighting with everything is hilarious and US peeps complaining about the same is equally funny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Commander shepard Newbie

Commander shepard

Posted
Posted (edited)

I'm no defender of TOP, but IRON members complaining that TOP isn't fighting with everything is hilarious and US peeps complaining about the same is equally funny.

 

I'm no defender of logical arguments but I don't think an IRON member complained about TOP in this thread and I don't think IRON is at the center of the conflict and I think IRON is fighting 55% of the current wars declared involving TLR which is slightly over 1 war for every nation of TLR nation out of PM.

Edited by Commander shepard
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Auctor Newbie

Auctor

Posted
Posted

That number of TLRemnants nations in war mode would be higher if IRON was fighting with all it had, or at least managed what it was fighting with well.

Might I add nearly all of STA's upper tier nations were allowed to escape into hippy to rebuy nukes because IRON wouldn't commit its upper tier? The amount of updeclares IRON is doing on its fronts when it has plenty of resources to not have to do so is frankly exasperating. Seriously, develop some self awareness. It'll come in handy later on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Commander shepard Newbie

Commander shepard

Posted
Posted

That number of TLRemnants nations in war mode would be higher if IRON was fighting with all it had, or at least managed what it was fighting with well.

I don't know, they don't seem to be exiting PM anytime soon.

 

 

Might I add nearly all of STA's upper tier nations were allowed to escape into hippy to rebuy nukes because IRON wouldn't commit its upper tier? The amount of updeclares IRON is doing on its fronts when it has plenty of resources to not have to do so is frankly exasperating. Seriously, develop some self awareness. It'll come in handy later on.

STA only has 1 nation above 100k, seems like it worked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hartfw Newbie

hartfw

Posted
Posted

Hart, the problem is the rest of their coalition is using nations with bad infra:tech ratios to fight. He'll if every AA on the other side PM'd like TOP, our coalition would outnumber their war mode nations.

So if other people need to fight with all they have, how come TOP doesn't?

 

Bad ratios, absolutely.  Bank like ratios of sub MP tech with that much infra?  I haven't seen it in general*, and doubt it.  Instead, you can see nations with those ratios sitting back in every aa that has them.  (For instance, if Nato had http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=340474 charge out of PM, I would criticize the choice as doing a ton of damage to yourself and very little to someone else.  That said, if its needed for a stagger then it could be worth it and hopefully the nation I picked doesn't feel singled out.)

 

Looking at TOP, I don't think anyone thinks of these 15 or so nations I highlighted back from the original list as the TOP military machine -- its not like they fought in Eq when most felt TOP went all in. But if the complaint is restricted to those nations here, then it can have a basis.  I just don't think its much of a complaint, and instead keeps trying to get wrapped up into something that looks much different -- like TOP didn't seriously engage the military they have versus sacrificing some nations with little capacity.  Now if the level at which TOP's tier of military got engaged this war wasn't enough, then go for a complaint about how TOP played a roll in engineering a war where this would be true, and opposing upper tiers would all be banks.  That should get some traction.

 

 

*One TLR nation did attack DoD at 14000 infra and sub 2k tech and get to get countered.  So he qualifies.  And kind of proves the point as that is a great way to go from 80k to 11k ns in a week or 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dochartaigh Newbie

Dochartaigh

Posted
Posted

Hart, the problem is the rest of their coalition is using nations with bad infra:tech ratios to fight. He'll if every AA on the other side PM'd like TOP, our coalition would outnumber their war mode nations.

So if other people need to fight with all they have, how come TOP doesn't?

 

Yeah, most alliances don't know how to build nations though. Thus, you have a shitload of nations with high infra:low tech ratios. If more alliances were built like TOP, then we would see a very similar strategy. So, other people are forced to fight with crap nations like that because otherwise they would only have 1/3rd of their alliance to fight with and 2/3rds in PM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starfox101 Newbie

Starfox101

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

That would be an over simplistic view on the NPO.

Of the top 50 NPO nations 92% of them are banks and I would not be one to throw banks out into a war, you need banks for rebuilding.

I don't want them sending bank nations out of peace mode to get pummeled so that would leave 4 NPO nations for war in the top 50.

 

Despite being outnumbered the NPO is giving out a good fight.

I am not worried at all about any of their nations below 50k NS that are in PM at the moment.

NPO has done the most damage out of everyone in the war.  They're not shrinking from the fight like you guys are trying to narrate and any attempt to frame it that way is, quite frankly, silly.  Have fun with making that thread though, I'm sure it will go places.

Banks?

 

We still use those?

 

You should know by now TOP has already moved on to the next war where half the suckers in their coaltion will be fighting on the the other side.  I do not blame them, so many of you idiots keep falling for it why should they stop.  Sign suprise treaty, get war rolling, peace it, pounce on weakened half of coalition next.  Rinse and repeat.    

Let me get this straight. TOP is "saving" it's NS to ally up with everyone they are fighting right now, and destroy the heart of the Polar coalition (XX, Polar allies)? What makes you think the enemy side would forgive and take TOP to get Polar, when it seems like TOP has just as much heat as we do. If anything, it simply proves we are better off together...

 

Seems pretty unlikely and incredibly paranoid...

 

 

I'm even more shocked at a santioned alliance with allies under attack has yet to enter the global war and being one of the last non neutral alliances left outside of the war. Which is pathetic really.

That's what happens when you have allies on both sides. It isn't a simple call. If R&R hits Polar, they are liable to being countered by Fark, an MDoAP partner, NPL, an MDoAP partner, Valhalla, an ODoAP partner, or RIA, a MDoAP partner. Easier to sit it out or jump into a mess? 

Edited by Starfox101
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Auctor Newbie

Auctor

Posted
Posted

That's what happens when you have allies on both sides. It isn't a simple call. If R&R hits Polar, they are liable to being countered by Fark, an MDoAP partner, NPL, an MDoAP partner, Valhalla, an ODoAP partner, or RIA, a MDoAP partner. Easier to sit it out or jump into a mess?

Similar considerations didn't stop Polaris from hitting TIO. Is XX just better than US?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
IYIyTh Newbie

IYIyTh

Posted
Posted

Effort

 

 

I wouldn't worry about it, Starfox.

 

Just a few people and alliances whom desperately want to sow discord at any and all costs between enemy coalition members at any cost.

 

Pretty shameless, tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starfox101 Newbie

Starfox101

Posted
Posted

 

 

I wouldn't worry about it, Starfox.

 

Just a few people and alliances whom desperately want to sow discord at any and all costs between enemy coalition members at any cost.

 

Pretty shameless, tbh.

True. That is what desperation brings. R&R is their new hero.

 

 

Similar considerations didn't stop Polaris from hitting TIO. Is XX just better than US?

Valid point. This is a mess, haha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
berbers Enthusiast

berbers

Posted
Posted

Similar considerations didn't stop Polaris from hitting TIO. Is XX just better than US?

 

Sparta asked NpO to counter, NATO/TIO did not ask R&R to counter?  That seems like a good reason for the difference in approach...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...