Inquisitor Tolkien Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 We need a new milestone. Hell's apparently frozen over too many times to be applicable anymore. When hell melts over, then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Your calculator is broken. I don't see how it is broken? lets do simple math. 5 goes into 20, four times. one fourth of 100 is 25. so if it was 5m out of 20 it would be 25% That 5m is out of 23m so it would have to be less than 25% 5/23 = .217 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senes Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 The peace mode argument is also invalid because NPO is supposed to be the aggressor here. If you're going to launch some holy crusade of liberation against the rampaging dictatorship, it really helps your cause if you don't push the opposite direction by accusing your enemies of not fighting hard enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capitalC Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Voted a month, but considering that we're talking the big bad NPO here, who has never lost a war, never surrendered, filled with fanatical fighters, a ingrained ideology and vibrant culture, they'll probably go into a very long phase of guerrilla warfare and it'll last several months before they either finally surrender (they'll be able to say that they did it with great honour until the bitter bitter end) or they disband. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 It is 3 weeks into nuclear war. Anyone in peacemode would be "the stronger membership" That's not happening with MK members in peace mode which kind of disvaildates your comparison from earlier of raw percentages in peace mode. 36 of their top 40 and 65 out of their top 80 are in peace mode. While it's true that those in war mode are gonna get knocked out, if it was really strategy you'd expect larger percentages than that to be out of war mode who just exited and haven't been knocked out of it yet. Unless they are planning on having one huge wave later on looks more likely that people are doing it to avoid war rather than as part of a military strategy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mykep Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 When I wear pants.. so never. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) That's not happening with MK members in peace mode which kind of disvaildates your comparison from earlier of raw percentages in peace mode.36 of their top 40 and 65 out of their top 80 are in peace mode. While it's true that those in war mode are gonna get knocked out, if it was really strategy you'd expect larger percentages than that to be out of war mode who just exited and haven't been knocked out of it yet. Unless they are planning on having one huge wave later on looks more likely that people are doing it to avoid war rather than as part of a military strategy. The comparison to Mk would much better reflect the polar war y'all fought (MK nations are not falling as much since you guys are fighting us 1 on 1 and we are fighting you 1 on 12?). I seem to recall many, including guys like airme in pm most the time. Thats not a slam, but a fact of war and strategy. I think however to make the claims NPO is not fighting is invalid and what the whole point of this was. Edited May 14, 2009 by mhawk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vhalen Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 I guess they didnt need more than 2 of the top 10 to knock VE off the sanction list? That seems likely. VE was right at the tippy top, as I recall. It was quite a feat, really. Ok so 5m ns out of 23m= 21% I never said they were, just as I'm sure most the NPO nations aren't there to escape entirely. I'd be more interested to see the %age who've been in PM the entire war, actually. Not interested enough to check the charts for all their PM nations, though. I think the whole argument is silly really. This is a dumb argument and you should all feel bad for wasting your time with it. If you look hard enough, you can find wisdom in any thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) The comparison to Mk would much better reflect the polar war y'all fought (MK nations are not falling as much since you guys are fighting us 1 on 1 and we are fighting you 1 on 12?). I seem to recall many, including guys like airme in pm most the time. Thats not a slam, but a fact of war and strategy. I think however to make the claims NPO is not fighting is invalid and what the whole point of this was. If we have nations in peace mode, you have plenty of other potential targets to hit with open slots. Also y'all are outnumbered but in real terms it ain't 1 on 12. Y'all were bigger than any alliance attacking you and MK/PC are taking about 3/4ths or more of the slots, with FoB and 1 or 2 others taking nearly all the rest. Comparing it to y'all: 22 out of your top 40 are in war mode, and 9 of your top 20 (comparable in NS range to NPO's top 80). 23 out of IRON's top 40 are in war mode and 56 out of their top 80. IRON has almost four times as many of their top 80 in war mode as NPO. Both you and IRON have more in your top 40 out of war mode than NPO has out of their top 80. Edited May 14, 2009 by Azaghul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diablo626 Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 I think its all a big conspiracy where all the NPOs banks use up the Billions saved by the NPOs masses working for them and their NS goes up so much that no one can attack them and they can just sit there and get stronger and stronger. Ha hahaha I am just kidding but that would be hilarious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) If we have nations in peace mode, you have plenty of other potential targets to hit with open slots.Also y'all are outnumbered but in real terms it ain't 1 on 12. Y'all were bigger than any alliance attacking you and MK/PC are taking about 3/4ths or more of the slots, with FoB and 1 or 2 others taking nearly all the rest. Comparing it to y'all: 22 out of your top 40 are in war mode, and 9 of your top 20 (comparable in NS range to NPO's top 80). 23 out of IRON's top 40 are in war mode and 56 out of their top 80. IRON has almost four times as many of their top 80 in war mode as NPO. Both you and IRON have more in your top 40 out of war mode than NPO has out of their top 80. Well as one of those bleeding for NPO, I have no problem with their deployments. I should have more invested in this type of argument anyways right? I would say yes we were bigger, but not significantly. Pre war TPF ~ 7.9 m Pre war PC + MK ~ 4.1 + 5.9 = 10m now add in the other guys GR, Avalanche, PC protectorates, CCC, FoB, including a round with NSO, IoM, TGR I think it is fair to say in real terms is very much still a one way battle Edited May 14, 2009 by mhawk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave93 Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 needs 1 more option Karma won't let them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Well as one of those bleeding for NPO, I have no problem with their deployments. I should have more invested in this type of argument anyways right? If it affects how long the war lasts it matters to everyone. I would say yes we were bigger, but not significantly. Pre war TPF ~ 7.9 m Pre war PC + MK ~ 4.1 + 5.9 = 10m now add in the other guys GR, Avalanche, PC protectorates, CCC, FoB, including a round with NSO, IoM, TGR I think it is fair to say in real terms is very much still a one way battle Keep in mind we also had other fights to deal with with your allies, MK with ML, CCC with NEW, PC with Valhalla, GR with OG, etc. Being officially at war doesn't mean people's efforts weren't divided and possibly mostly engaged elsewhere. I'm not claiming we didn't have a numbers advantage, we did. But it's not as great as the 1-12 figure tries to suggest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) If it affects how long the war lasts it matters to everyone.Keep in mind we also had other fights to deal with with your allies, MK with ML, CCC with NEW, PC with Valhalla, GR with OG, etc. Being officially at war doesn't mean people's efforts weren't divided and possibly mostly engaged elsewhere. I'm not claiming we didn't have a numbers advantage, we did. But it's not as great as the 1-12 figure tries to suggest. Alright lets call it... 5 on 1? Edited May 14, 2009 by mhawk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDave Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Given enough time, no matter what nations entered peacemode, they will comprise a majority of NS. How many of those in peacemode were out in warmode fighting prior? Certainly kingdom of dark was, I saw him roll over tailsk, but he got back into peace mode after that war. You can argue about the strategies used, but to say they are "Not fighting the war" is pretty hard to sell no matter what statistics you look at. When I checked yesterday, 17 of the top 20 had not been in the war, one slipped into peace and two were fighting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GwadHagEnor Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 They were the first involved in the war, so I can't imagine them surrending, and that's good, as then roles are changing in game (new leading alliances/nations). Death before dishonor must be every nation/alliance motto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CptGodzilla Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 War : 625MK peacemode/total 33/155 = 21% NPO peacemode/total 226/884 = 30% I'm not quite sure that 9% difference validates the claims of fighting a war vs not fighting a war. OH HEY I LIEK NUMBARS TOO!!!!!! NPO peace mode / total 259 / 875 = 29.6% NPO nation strength in peace mode / total 5,334,088 / 9,694,631 = 55% So that means that NPO is hiding over 1/2 their current Nation Strength in peace mode Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neneko Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Voted npo will win the war. Pacifica prevails! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Hakai Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Voted npo will win the war. Pacifica prevails! I agree with this post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 OH HEY I LIEK NUMBARS TOO!!!!!!NPO peace mode / total 259 / 875 = 29.6% NPO nation strength in peace mode / total 5,334,088 / 9,694,631 = 55% So that means that NPO is hiding over 1/2 their current Nation Strength in peace mode You may like numbers, but that framing is not a good snap shot of fighting a war. Eventually the number in peacemode will invariably be a larger portion of NS. By your own figures the current number in peacemode accounts for less than 25% of their original NS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Alright lets call it... 5 on 1? At most 2-1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flak attack Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 At most 2-1. He's got it best. Now, it's CCC, MK, PC, DT and FoB on TPF. GR is throwing all they have at NPO, and Avalanche is using about 1/2 of theirs on NPO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 He's got it best. Now, it's CCC, MK, PC, DT and FoB on TPF. GR is throwing all they have at NPO, and Avalanche is using about 1/2 of theirs on NPO. I'm talking original NS not just pure count of alliances. All the alliances on TPF were smaller than TPF to smart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhawk Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 TPF to smart. Finally we agree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Finally we agree touche OOC: It's what I get for posting after taking a 3 hour final after only getting two hours of sleep because I was studying for it. 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.