A Message from the Emperor of the New Pacific Order

[Opportunity]

Wars are not decided by who has the highest win/loss ratio, wars are decided by who does proportionally more damage.  Your coalition may be roughly equal in terms of damage done and taken but proportionally, you have lost a lot more.

 

I can think of many wars where the nation or alliance dealing proportionally more damage can claim no victory. On Planet Bob and perhaps other planets ;)

[Daenerys Targaryen]

Wars are not decided by who has the highest win/loss ratio, wars are decided by who does proportionally more damage.  Your coalition may be roughly equal in terms of damage done and taken but proportionally, you have lost a lot more.

Exactly, the Polar coalition has more total nations so the damage is spread out more. Wheres the damage for the NSO coalition is more concentrated.

[JoshuaR]

Which was the same term you put on NPO at the end of the NPO/DH war, difference being, the above never happened and you all got white peace.

Isn't it curious? Umbrella has never asked for reparations and never had to invent a special type of end-of-war scenario other than admission of defeat and white peace in any of our wars... except with this one pesky alliance that hid its upper tier in peace mode in that war. 

 

I'm sensing a pattern.

 

No, the difference being that in the former war, NPO upper tier nations avoided war by utilizing peace mode, and those specific nations were asked to fight. In the latter example, Umbrella had been in war mode from the beginning and shed huge portions of tech, NS, score, or whatever metrics of fighting a war you prefer to use. We were already an alliance that had faced an extended war.

 

NPO got 21 days of war for ten nations above 80k NS and twelve below. Recall just how many members NPO has as a whole. And consider again that these were nations hiding in PM. The entire coalition wasn't jumping in, either, just those already at war.

 

Umbrella got 30 days for 80+ nations (four below 50k NS would have been allowed to be in PM per the terms of our agreement, and four above, but we weren't going to peace those nations because our higher strength tier was better served fighting). All of our nations had, again, been fighting the entire war.

 

Methrage et al.

I recognize, as per the above replies, that somehow in between Pacifica enlisting us into an extended war and Brehon getting the rest of his coalition to volunteer to fight us after signing that agreement, something magical happened, but I'm not going to pretend Brehon in all his magnanimous benevolence decided to let Umbrella off the hook. We got lucky that the anti-BIBO coalition fractured and that Pacifica's planned meatshields this time refused to fight for an alliance that was (you guessed it) not going to participate in the main theater of combat and face the nations Brehon wanted crushed.

 

All of that said, these facts were initially reported to assuage the curiosity of a couple posters in response to Marx's excellent example of Pacifican hypocrisy, not to talk about other wars entirely.

[Sephiroth]

NPO made a lot of alliances up set by how they handled the negotiations in EQ. They even lost IRON as a result. But theirs no doubt they saved CnG some pixels but I doubt Umbrella as they won and controlled the top tiers of the EQ war.

Regardless of how damaged Umbrella was, punishing alliances with whatever terms were discussed but never implemented is ridiculous. Then alliances would feel if they start with harsh terms when they don't think the war has went on long enough, they actually need to implement them at the end of the war to cripple opponents. If Umbrella's side thinks the war should go on a little longer, so be it. Although I very much doubt we'll see NPO agreeing to any special terms at the conclusion, as their side can continue to fight much longer if need be and it wouldn't be to other side's benefit to do so if they don't want the same special treatment for their alliances in the future.

[Azaghul]

 

I can think of many wars where the nation or alliance dealing proportionally more damage can claim no victory. On Planet Bob and perhaps other planets ;)

There will always be some nations or alliances that are exceptions to the general trend, but what matters is what happens on an overall coalition level.

[Bob]

Can anyone shed light on what Marx was saying about the Umbrella terms last war? Would be great to hear more about this. :)

Terms were extended war, NPO wasn't really in favor and they pushed for an end to the war (it also was very clear that while the "coalition" was interested in Umbrella being punished, no one wanted to do that punishing who had the ability to do so).

[Daenerys Targaryen]

Regardless of how damaged Umbrella was, punishing alliances with whatever terms were discussed but never implemented is ridiculous. Then alliances would feel if they start with harsh terms when they don't think the war has went on long enough, they actually need to implement them at the end of the war to cripple opponents. If Umbrella's side thinks the war should go on a little longer, so be it. Although I very much doubt we'll see NPO agreeing to any special terms at the conclusion, as their side can continue to fight much longer if need be and it wouldn't be to other side's benefit to do so if they don't want the same special treatment for their alliances in the future.

The north will never forget. Good, let them remember what happens when they march on the south.

[Vol Navy]

Isn't it curious? Umbrella has never asked for reparations and never had to invent a special type of end-of-war scenario other than admission of defeat and white peace in any of our wars... except with this one pesky alliance that hid its upper tier in peace mode in that war. 

 

I'm sensing a pattern.

 

No, the difference being that in the former war, NPO upper tier nations avoided war by utilizing peace mode, and those specific nations were asked to fight. In the latter example, Umbrella had been in war mode from the beginning and shed huge portions of tech, NS, score, or whatever metrics of fighting a war you prefer to use. We were already an alliance that had faced an extended war.

 

NPO got 21 days of war for ten nations above 80k NS and twelve below. Recall just how many members NPO has as a whole. And consider again that these were nations hiding in PM. The entire coalition wasn't jumping in, either, just those already at war.

 

Umbrella got 30 days for 80+ nations (four below 50k NS would have been allowed to be in PM per the terms of our agreement, and four above, but we weren't going to peace those nations because our higher strength tier was better served fighting). All of our nations had, again, been fighting the entire war.

 

Methrage et al.

I recognize, as per the above replies, that somehow in between Pacifica enlisting us into an extended war and Brehon getting the rest of his coalition to volunteer to fight us after signing that agreement, something magical happened, but I'm not going to pretend Brehon in all his magnanimous benevolence decided to let Umbrella off the hook. We got lucky that the anti-BIBO coalition fractured and that Pacifica's planned meatshields this time refused to fight for an alliance that was (you guessed it) not going to participate in the main theater of combat and face the nations Brehon wanted crushed.

 

All of that said, these facts were initially reported to assuage the curiosity of a couple posters in response to Marx's excellent example of Pacifican hypocrisy, not to talk about other wars entirely.

Once again, you speak of something you didn't have to do at all at the end of a 2 month war  vs something you made someone else do, in a war you where you aggressively pre-empted them, at the end of a 5 month war. In TPF we also fought the extended war and also had to pay money reps to GOONS after we came out of it. Which GOONS used to promptly buy tech to send to Umbrella. You can say you never took reps, but you very well did, GOONS just exchanged the cash and turned it into tech for you.

 

And Brehon/NPO took a ton of heat from coalition members and allies for shoving that white peace through. It's something Umbrella would never have done if the situations were reversed, much like you're not willing to let NPO get white peace here over 10% of their nations being in PM. We fought TOP in EQ and they kept right at 50% of their alliance in PM for nearly the entire conflict. TOP got white peace just like UMB did. 

 

Now NPO is paying for that mistake, among others. I have always said it and I'll say it again, you guys show no mercy, never have. It's why you win most global conflicts, you make the alliances you've defeated take it hard on the chin via length of war and exit terms both. NPO wasn't willing to do that in EQ and now they're paying the price. 

[Daenerys Targaryen]

 It's why you win most global conflicts

Obviously doing something right then

[JoshuaR]

Once again, you speak of something you didn't have to do at all at the end of a 2 month war  vs something you made someone else do, in a war you where you aggressively pre-empted them, at the end of a 5 month war. In TPF we also fought the extended war and also had to pay money reps to GOONS after we came out of it. Which GOONS used to promptly buy tech to send to Umbrella. You can say you never took reps, but you very well did, GOONS just exchanged the cash and turned it into tech for you.

 

And Brehon/NPO took a ton of heat from coalition members and allies for shoving that white peace through. It's something Umbrella would never have done if the situations were reversed, much like you're not willing to let NPO get white peace here over 10% of their nations being in PM. We fought TOP in EQ and they kept right at 50% of their alliance in PM for nearly the entire conflict. TOP got white peace just like UMB did. 

 

Now NPO is paying for that mistake, among others. I have always said it and I'll say it again, you guys show no mercy, never have. It's why you win most global conflicts, you make the alliances you've defeated take it hard on the chin via length of war and exit terms both. NPO wasn't willing to do that in EQ and now they're paying the price. 

Honestly had forgotten TPF was part of that. I had just joined Umbrella at about the time the agreement was reached and only saw NPO targets. You guys certainly never back down from war or try to avoid it.

 

I think you're mistaken. Umbrella isn't even a part of the current peace talks. I've only elaborated on the comparison because others brought it up, and at this point there's nothing more to say on that unrelated and out-of-topic thread of conversation. The PM term, now aid restriction, for thirty three nations that have been in PM the entirety of this war was a clever idea by one of the combatants facing Pacifica that in order to discourage future use of PM (which unnecessarily lengthens wars such as these), only nations utilizing PM would be punished, and they would be punished not with war or reparations, but instead with a taste of their own medicine. It was a clever, light, but frustrating idea for peace terms, and as much as Pacifica cries about how terrible it is, all the shouting in the world isn't going to convince our coalition that it's anything more than it is.

 

I've already shown the math, and you can argue all you want that it's over-the-top harsh to deny "banks" the opportunity to import tech, but they still come out far ahead of any nation that has actually participated in this war. If NPO wants to argue more that these high tech nations have no military purpose, then I'm sure they could counter offer no outgoing aid restriction and in good faith promise zero tech importation, and I would be surprised if our coalition wouldn't accept that.

[Pax Animi]

Thanks for the information JoshuaR :) Didn't mean to make you the target of the debate though lol.

[Vol Navy]

Obviously doing something right then

I didn't say it was wrong, it's very smart on their part. 

[Neo Uruk]

I didn't say it was wrong, it's very smart on their part.

EQ made a lot of mistakes, one of which was fumbling negotiations (which worked to Polar's benefit, at least)

[Daenerys Targaryen]

I didn't say it was wrong, it's very smart on their part. 

I didn't say you were wrong.

[Dochartaigh]

 

NSO is 1,050,606 negative, RnR is 1,551,099. That's 2,601,705 Damage right there. The NPO coalition is only trailing by 2,533,989 damage in total, LESS than the negative damage ratios of just two of the coalition members. Our top fighting alliances are far superior to the NpO coalition in terms of damage output. This will remain so until NpO and their lackeys white peace out.

 

NPO- 718,858 positive

NG- 148,503 positive

NoR- 796,187 positive

AI- 222,102 positive

SNAFU- 18,329 positive

 

Total- 1,903,979 positive 

 

So this is the total of all 5 alliances on your side that have a positive damage ratio. 

 

TOP- 1,473,555 positive (that is only 430,424 difference between just TOP and all your top 5...)

VE- 901,870 positive

Umbrella- 974,659 positive

NpO- 411,743 positive (so just TOP/Polar almost makes the total of your top 5. Just 18.7k difference)

Fark- 405,136 positive

MI6- 374,483 positive 

GOONs- 390.774 positive

NPL- 411,088 positive

 

I could post a few more but most are around 200k positive or less. 

 

So, if your entire premise is that doing more damage makes an alliance "superior", then we most assuredly have the best 3 in this war on the winning side. NG is actually doing worse than AI. And again, your top 5 is barely beating 2 of our alliances in damage differentials. 

 

So please, stop spouting off about how your side is "superior". Yes, NPO/NoR are excellent fighters. NG is meh. But yes, please keep talking about how your top alliances are better than ours in terms of damage output. Pacifica is #1 in terms of damage inflicted with Polaris as #2. Thus, the top 2 are from each side. Yes, I will concede that you have 6 out of the top 10 in terms of damage inflicted but you also have 7 of the top 10 in terms of damage taken. Out of the 6 in damage inflicted, 3 have taken more damage than inflicted. NG is getting close to taking more damage than they have inflicted as well. Same with SNAFU and AI. 

[Commander shepard]

If this is the case, why not offer terms that allow sending aid for rebuilding, but not for receiving aid - especially technology aid?

 
Good idea.
 

Good choice OP, continue to fight, at the current rate your side will hit closer to 0s across the board long before the Polar Coaliton will. Also please feel free to pretend I speak for NpO here when I obviously don't as you can tell by my activity if you check my last log in date on the NpO forums. I'm just happy to stay inactive and watch you guys who tried to take us out burn even longer.

Well if NPO can rebuild without the nations in PM then I imagine they will be able to burn their enemies for a long time to come.
 

In 2011, Polar agreed to terms that prohibited any aid sent or received for a month. Their 350ish nations missed roughly 15 slots each for that 30 day period, which assuming each slot went used for sending/receiving cash, like Farrin's claims here, it prevented $8 billion in aid from being sent/received. No one made claims that they'd be that crippling, because they weren't. Polar bounced back fine, so will NPO. You can keep throwing around hyperbole about how crippling these are, but they're pretty mild when you sit back and stop complaining for a minute and consider them.

 
And since that period it was almost 2 years since NpO were a major part of a global war.
And it's not like they grew a lot in that period of minimal war. 
 

Also, thanks to this post, I kind of hope the Polar coalition will just say $%&@ you to NPO and bring back the original terms, but this time (to prevent more whining from NSO's side) include every alliance on NSO's side in the terms. This would have been one thing like a month ago but negotiations have taken place and apparently instead of continuing to try and negotiate, we get this instead. 
 
So ya know what, if NPO wants to push this back to the original terms, then again, $%&@ them and push this !@#$ back to the original terms but include everyone on the losing side. If they don't like it oh well. I say only increase the terms every time they don't surrender to the terms currently in place (beginning with the original terms).

 
Sounds like a good plan, who will be fighting them?
 

The New Pacific Order, among several others, tried to levy terms on Umbrella that would prevent any of them from sending or receiving foreign aid for up to 6 months or more in the last conflict. 

 

Umbrella didn't really have much of a low tier so there was little need for aid in rebuilding.

But hey I remember there was a lot of jumping AA's and DBDC who didn't give a crap about anything so they could have aided the Umbrella low tier nations who needed rebuilding. 

 

[Neo Uruk]

If we had a top tier advantage we could probably brag about our inflated damage per war too!

e: To be fair this probably goes a lot less for GOONS, NPL, and Polar (iirc?) than for the others.

Edited January 27, 2014 by Neo Uruk

[Unknown Smurf]

Except the top 3 alliances with the biggest damage done to damage taken, are TOP, Umbrella and VE.  Its almost seems like some alliances are better at war than other alliances.

 

Where are you guys getting yoru warstats from? 

 

Kaskus was #1 by far. 

 

:smug:

 

EDIT: Oh wait TOP surpassed us. :(

 

https://docs.google.com/a/terpmail.umd.edu/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqaCrij7SLiidG1fLTNRUWJqaW5WdTRqbTVQS0JPd0E&usp=sharing

 

Bottom 10 from worst to better: RnR, TIO, NSO, Valhalla, MHA, TLR, UCR, CCC, SL, The Int. Note bottom 3 are all NPO side. 

Edited January 27, 2014 by Unknown Smurf

[Vandal]

Good luck NPO.  Hope something reasonable gets offered up soon.  If not, meh... We just keep fighting sitting in peace mode.

 

Fixed that for you.

[Goldie]

 
NSO is 1,050,606 negative, RnR is 1,551,099. That's 2,601,705 Damage right there. The NPO coalition is only trailing by 2,533,989 damage in total, LESS than the negative damage ratios of just two of the coalition members. Our top fighting alliances are far superior to the NpO coalition in terms of damage output. This will remain so until NpO and their lackeys white peace out.

Competence out damaged EQ by a vast margin. That was also in a beat down against Competence. I really love how the readily accessible stats have made some alliances think they haven't been smoked, so that they continue volunteering for extended smoking.

NPO can continue to claim whatever they want about their performance, but figure much of it has to do with how valiantly people focused on ensuring their defense and limiting their damage through counters. TOP and Polar have much attention elsewhere, and MI6, Sparta, and Invicta all focused on D. That'll let NPO have decent numbers, but are they really that much better than their allies, or did their allies just not have the luxury of tens of millions of NS in reserve?

Would you rather be NPO, with their losses all swallowed by them and their entire ally core thoroughly destroyed, or be the several alliances who neatly spread their NS losses among themselves, were able to cycle nations out, and who in most cases can probably snap back decently. It is a complete myth that NPO has been anything but smashed, but their arrogance over the truly mild terms that Sparta/Polar have allowed means that it is now on NPO to at least try to meet the coalition half way, if they care about concluding this war.

[Goldie]

And since that period it was almost 2 years since NpO were a major part of a global war.
And it's not like they grew a lot in that period of minimal war. 
 

Even if that were true, it wouldnt change my point, that its a fact that Polar accepted their terms to get their allies out, and we were hailed for being so lenient. Again, those terms accepted were vastly more damaging than these. I recall a very quick and easy negotiation in query with Random on them (and were it not for ROK refusing to surrender and GOD trying to disband UPN, they'd have had the terms halved), and a fine conclusion to that war. NPO is being stubborn here, and they had to make this post to announce that they care for their allies, as their actions continue to see them crippled.

But your point isn't true, and its rendered truly dumb because within months of that war's conclusion, your alliance hit Polar in Grudge. Polar took their (far more damaging) terms, snapped back, got rolled again, snapped back. Let's all stop pretending that these terms will keep NPO from ever getting themselves strong again, because we all know they're too strong willed for that.

[hartfw]

Once again, you speak of something you didn't have to do at all at the end of a 2 month war  vs something you made someone else do, in a war you where you aggressively pre-empted them, at the end of a 5 month war. In TPF we also fought the extended war and also had to pay money reps to GOONS after we came out of it. Which GOONS used to promptly buy tech to send to Umbrella. You can say you never took reps, but you very well did, GOONS just exchanged the cash and turned it into tech for you.

 

And Brehon/NPO took a ton of heat from coalition members and allies for shoving that white peace through. It's something Umbrella would never have done if the situations were reversed, much like you're not willing to let NPO get white peace here over 10% of their nations being in PM. We fought TOP in EQ and they kept right at 50% of their alliance in PM for nearly the entire conflict. TOP got white peace just like UMB did. 

 

Now NPO is paying for that mistake, among others. I have always said it and I'll say it again, you guys show no mercy, never have. It's why you win most global conflicts, you make the alliances you've defeated take it hard on the chin via length of war and exit terms both. NPO wasn't willing to do that in EQ and now they're paying the price. 

 

Since we are talking about the upper tier, I have trouble with that 50% figure that you are citing.

 

 

 

Of TOP's 40 highest tech nations, 35 were held in war mode until the war ended or they deleted.  1 more escaped to peace mode, then came back and was staggered the rest of the way. 

Edited January 27, 2014 by hartfw

[Auctor]

That 50% number only works if you don't count the nations TOP had that deleted and are using a strict membership(not NS) metric. TPF didn't want to give TOP white peace either, for that matter.

[Commander shepard]

But your point isn't true, and its rendered truly dumb because within months of that war's conclusion, your alliance hit Polar in Grudge. Polar took their (far more damaging) terms, snapped back, got rolled again, snapped back. Let's all stop pretending that these terms will keep NPO from ever getting themselves strong again, because we all know they're too strong willed for that.

 

I thought you were referring to Byepolar for some reason.

Hence the almost 2 years since it ended.

[Starfox101]

If we had a top tier advantage we could probably brag about our inflated damage per war too!

e: To be fair this probably goes a lot less for GOONS, NPL, and Polar (iirc?) than for the others.

Inflated? That's the most expensive damage to replace. Not sure that's the correct word there.