Mogar Posted January 2, 2009 Report Share Posted January 2, 2009 anyone who collects with Gcamps is retarded, you simply delete them, like you delete labor camps when you collect, and the addition efficiency will help if you are concerned about being attacked, it's up to you whether or not you wish to be prepared for war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zzzptm Posted January 2, 2009 Report Share Posted January 2, 2009 Prepared for war... how many of the 27,978 nations on Bob are *really* prepared for war? (wow... it was 28,002 earlier today... 0.1% drop... beats oil futures...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steelrat Posted January 3, 2009 Report Share Posted January 3, 2009 (edited) anyone who collects with Gcamps is retarded, you simply delete them, like you delete labor camps when you collect, and the addition efficiency will help if you are concerned about being attacked, it's up to you whether or not you wish to be prepared for war. Can´t say it better You can swap "everything" so you are prepared and still save a lot of cash, as long as you don´t have a WRC. Then swapping Tanks is not profitable anymore. The higher you are ranked the more paranoid you should be, Nations in the top 100 should always be prepared. Nations without WRC and ~8k Infra with a 10day collection cycle "Rogue" protection if you are paranoid Nukes, max out AirForce, max out CM, 50 or zero, does not matter much Navy, confidential issue, no advise Soldier, get max, decom before you pay bills and to get the -1 envi bonus when you collect. Rebuy only in Defcon 1 Tanks, get max or close to max, decom before you pay bills. Rebuy only in Defcon 1 LC and GC, pay bills, decom, collect, rebuy It´s up to you what you want, either stay maxed out or stay with the minimum/zero. Something in between makes no sense. Nations with a WRC and above 9k Infra with a 10day collection cycle Only difference is it´s not profitable anymore to swap tanks. Edited January 3, 2009 by Steelrat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxodi Posted January 4, 2009 Report Share Posted January 4, 2009 With a navy I would keep 5 carriers and the planes, for th eair force edge, and maybe some ground bonus ships. The rest would be stockpiled as a war approaches, as usually you have a few days warning. This. Other then that just keep full AF, minimal soldiers, full spies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drai Posted January 4, 2009 Report Share Posted January 4, 2009 (edited) Personally, I keep min soldiers, no tanks, no cruise missiles, full airforce, full navy, full nukes, and full spies. Edited January 4, 2009 by Drai Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpreb Posted January 4, 2009 Report Share Posted January 4, 2009 I don't think there is an alliance in the game that is going to launch a competent blitz on another alliance without putting their banks into peace mode first. The concept of bank nations was dropped after GWIII in TOP. Afterwards we never used banking in any military connection since it serves no meaning full purpose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zzzptm Posted January 4, 2009 Report Share Posted January 4, 2009 (edited) Banks are needed only for nations too dumb to not have warchests. EDIT for logic... needed a "not" in that sentence above... Edited January 4, 2009 by zzzptm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenrir69 Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 I keep soldiers, guerrilla camps, whatever CMs are left over from my last war, full aircraft, full nukes, and a half-full navy... The bills are bad, but a small price to pay for my military readiness. Interested in joining the Mushroom Kingdom??!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshuaR Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Say ten days... $350k in purchases and upkeep for camps. Reduces soldier bills by 50%. Since I only hold about 75k troops, the net loss for holding GCs is about $65,000. That's only a difference of about the cost of one improvement per day. Well worth it, I say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Xnut Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 The way the game works right now there really isn't much of a use to have any standing army. If you have a big war chest and you get attacked you can just max out your military in a matter of secounds. If the original attack droped your infra level you can even rebuy the infra if your war chest is large enough. Untill some kind of a build up time is added to the game you don't really need to buy an army before you need it if you have a war chest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Locke Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 (edited) Number of Soldiers 65,000 Daily Soldier Cost (Per 1 Unit) $0.75 Soldier Bill $48,750.00 That's like a drop in the bucket really, ~1.5% of my annual income if I just stop all growth. Number of Cruise Missiles 50 Daily Cruise Missiles Cost (Per 1 Unit) $160.00 Cruise Missiles Bill $8,000.00 Oh the terror! LESS than a day's income a YEAR. $2,920,000 Number of Aircraft 85 Daily Aircraft Cost (Per 1 Unit) $150.00 Aircraft Bill $12,750.00 Just over a day's income per YEAR. $4,653,750. Number of Nuclear Weapons 25 Daily Nuclear Weapon Cost (Per 1 Unit) $27,200.00 Nuclear Weapon Bill $680,000.00 This one is outrageous, but nothing much we can do is there? $248,200,000/year, that's actually a large chunk of an annual budget, but it's NUKES! Now infra on the other side...THAT is outrageous. Everytime my navy/nukes make me cry, I just look at my infra bill. Edited January 14, 2009 by Michael Locke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted January 15, 2009 Report Share Posted January 15, 2009 Number of Nuclear Weapons 25Daily Nuclear Weapon Cost (Per 1 Unit) $27,200.00 Nuclear Weapon Bill $680,000.00 This one is outrageous, but nothing much we can do is there? $248,200,000/year, that's actually a large chunk of an annual budget, but it's NUKES! Temp trading ftw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted January 16, 2009 Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 Temp trading ftw. or natural lead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mirreille Posted January 16, 2009 Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 Temp trading ftw. This is true, but it requires a certain amount of dedication and effort that a lot of people are not willing to put into a game, plus it requires reliable people with the right resources...commodities that not every one has access to. One thing I wonder about though; would you continue temp trading in war-time? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.