philp110 Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 So I've not bought infra/land in... well a LONG time. Been pretty much doing nothing but buying an occasional wonder and some tech. So my war chest is - well it's ridiculous. I crossed the $2B mark a month or two ago. I'm just curious what other larger nations are saving these days, as I've been out of the loop for a long while. A year or more ago when I was more active politically I seem to remember larger nations having at least 300-500K saved if they were well prepared, and the occasional nation hitting the Billion dollar mark if they were REALLY prepared. So, if you don't mind me asking - what's your warchest looking like these days? Or pre-Karma war, if you want to look back on the good-old-days before your nation was glowing green. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Stupid Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 So I've not bought infra/land in... well a LONG time. Been pretty much doing nothing but buying an occasional wonder and some tech. So my war chest is - well it's ridiculous. I crossed the $2B mark a month or two ago. I'm just curious what other larger nations are saving these days, as I've been out of the loop for a long while. A year or more ago when I was more active politically I seem to remember larger nations having at least 300-500K saved if they were well prepared, and the occasional nation hitting the Billion dollar mark if they were REALLY prepared. So, if you don't mind me asking - what's your warchest looking like these days? Or pre-Karma war, if you want to look back on the good-old-days before your nation was glowing green. More importantly who are you saving it for? HECTORRRR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philp110 Posted October 21, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 More importantly who are you saving it for?HECTORRRR lol, oh yeah. YOU. Someday you'll get large enough for me to declare on you... someday... HECTOOOOORRRRR!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overlord Shinnra Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 lol, oh yeah. YOU. Someday you'll get large enough for me to declare on you... someday... HECTOOOOORRRRR!!! you have a bit more then me. But your sitting good at 2b for sure. More then good if you ask me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaone Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 For a nation at your infra level your warchest is quite good, I think normally it is advised for nations around 8500 to have around 500M. I'm planning to get the high infra wonders and then stay at 14K infra to work at my warchest till I get about the same amount as you have now. The highest warchest I heard of was Matt Miller who had at the onset of the Karma war a warchest of over 5 Billion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Grist Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 (edited) My warchest isnt great...though, thats because of the mass amounts of infrastructure I've been buying. So now I buy infra and leave a certain amount each day for it to build up. Dont see the point in stunting my nations growth for months on end when I can build a warchest the same time as buying infra. Edited October 21, 2009 by Jack Grist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jer Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 My warchest isnt great...though, thats because of the mass amounts of infrastructure I've been buying. So now I buy infra and leave a certain amount each day for it to build up. Dont see the point in stunting my nations growth for months on end when I can build a warchest the same time as buying infra. You will understand why warchests should be high priority at some point. The only question is whether it is now whilst you can do something about it or later when your nation is neutralised early on in a war and unable to even defend itself, let alone assist any of your alliance-mates. Your re-growth after a war will also be severely stunted in comparison with nations that can use the leftovers of a warchest to re-build straight away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 My warchest isnt great...though, thats because of the mass amounts of infrastructure I've been buying. So now I buy infra and leave a certain amount each day for it to build up. Dont see the point in stunting my nations growth for months on end when I can build a warchest the same time as buying infra. If you have less than at least 150M on hand right now you are next to useless in a large war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedestro Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 I'm proud of my warchest, I have no idea how it compares to other nations my size. Can't wait to find out when and if I go to war Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich333 Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 I consider $3B to be the absolute minimum for a nation like mine. Beyond that, I'd rather not share; it's more fun if it's a surprise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philp110 Posted October 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 You will understand why warchests should be high priority at some point. The only question is whether it is now whilst you can do something about it or later when your nation is neutralised early on in a war and unable to even defend itself, let alone assist any of your alliance-mates. Your re-growth after a war will also be severely stunted in comparison with nations that can use the leftovers of a warchest to re-build straight away. You are completely correct, of course. In the "no-CB war" I blew through nearly $250M in 10 days of war far too quickly. Though Jack Grist is in a neutral alliance, so I can't say I blame him for not having a large war chest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Grist Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 You are completely correct, of course. In the "no-CB war" I blew through nearly $250M in 10 days of war far too quickly. Though Jack Grist is in a neutral alliance, so I can't say I blame him for not having a large war chest. Thanks for pointing this out, as yes, I am in a neutral alliance, so my top priority is not building my cash for a future war but increasing my size aswell as yes, putting some cash torwards my warchest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jer Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 I will just leave this here: http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Continuum-GPA_War Unless you are permanently in peace mode you are NEVER safe from war in CN. All it takes is one slip up from one of your leaders or even one of your members and you could be jumped on as the easy target with no military treaties and a lax attitude to preparing your nations, so you really have just as much of an obligation to save a warchest as any other allied nation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philp110 Posted October 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 (edited) I will just leave this here: http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Continuum-GPA_War Unless you are permanently in peace mode you are NEVER safe from war in CN. All it takes is one slip up from one of your leaders or even one of your members and you could be jumped on as the easy target with no military treaties and a lax attitude to preparing your nations, so you really have just as much of an obligation to save a warchest as any other allied nation. lol, true to a certain extent. Though there were some circumstances there that will never happen with TDO. GPA was the largest alliance at the time and had an amazing run of ridiculous decisions and public facepalm moments, most of which were made to seem worse than they actually were by the great propaganda machine of NPO/Continuum so as to rid them of their spot and put NPO in it. Today's political world attitudes and such would never allow this to happen to a GPA or TDO over things so trivial. Edited October 23, 2009 by phillip110 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaone Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 lol, true to a certain extent. Though there were some circumstances there that will never happen with TDO. GPA was the largest alliance at the time and had an amazing run of ridiculous decisions and public facepalm moments, most of which were made to seem worse than they actually were by the great propaganda machine of NPO/Continuum so as to rid them of their spot and put NPO in it. Today's political world attitudes and such would never allow this to happen to a GPA or TDO over things so trivial. never say never, who's going to stop an alliance from attacking the neutrals? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Grist Posted October 24, 2009 Report Share Posted October 24, 2009 (edited) never say never, who's going to stop an alliance from attacking the neutrals? But why would an alliance leader be stupid enough to make a full on assault on an alliance thats in the top 20 strongest, even if they are neutral? Fair enough, ofcourse its possible, but since the attack would most probably be a rogue unless we actually did get involved in something we couldnt handle, then maybe, but I think the alliance who made the first attack would have alot more problems. It would also be a waste of time on their behalf, not to mention the fact they would have allies/friends to deal with. Edited October 24, 2009 by Jack Grist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted October 26, 2009 Report Share Posted October 26, 2009 But why would an alliance leader be stupid enough to make a full on assault on an alliance thats in the top 20 strongest, even if they are neutral? Fair enough, ofcourse its possible, but since the attack would most probably be a rogue unless we actually did get involved in something we couldnt handle, then maybe, but I think the alliance who made the first attack would have alot more problems.It would also be a waste of time on their behalf, not to mention the fact they would have allies/friends to deal with. If everyone in your alliance has no warchest there is essentially no reason NOT to attack you, since your alliance will effectively not be able to fight back. Fighting wars against people who are saying "we don't fight back?!" is good training for alliances that may not have experience in launching or coordinating large scale wars. Might actually not be the most unlikely scenario. The Green Protection Agency got completely annihilated by a bunch of people in spite of the fact that they were neutral and effectively no threat at all to anyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heracles the Great Posted October 26, 2009 Report Share Posted October 26, 2009 Since you're in TDO you probably don't need a $2b warchest, but then again I'm sure some in GPA said that as well... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zzzptm Posted October 27, 2009 Report Share Posted October 27, 2009 Anyone else starting to get a vibe that the next war will be the "No Warchest" war? I spied on a nation a few weeks back during a bit of lulz and now I have warchest envy. My warchest is [redacted], but I am building it and it will be larger with each passing day, kind of like a hungry American that lives next door to a McDonald's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philp110 Posted October 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 27, 2009 Since you're in TDO you probably don't need a $2b warchest, but then again I'm sure some in GPA said that as well... I'm well aware I don't need that much, lol. This thread is not about my preparedness, just curiosity of what others are saving these days as I've been out of the loop for about a year now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heracles the Great Posted October 27, 2009 Report Share Posted October 27, 2009 As long as you have 20x bills to cover a b/c you're fine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decomposition Posted October 27, 2009 Report Share Posted October 27, 2009 As long as you have 20x bills to cover a b/c you're fine 20 days worth of bills will get eaten up in about 5 days if you are trying keep up your airforce, navy, and nuke count against more than one attacker with a full navy, airforce, SDI wonder, with full compliment of spies. My current goal is to have at least 100 days worth of bills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heracles the Great Posted October 27, 2009 Report Share Posted October 27, 2009 Like war ever comes without a good 3 month warning.... You're better off growing as fast as you can and then building a war chest when war is on the horizon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timtacious Posted October 27, 2009 Report Share Posted October 27, 2009 My warchest is.. OVER NINE THOUSAND Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiasmaCircle Posted October 27, 2009 Report Share Posted October 27, 2009 I'm sitting at about 30 Mil, which is pretty ok for a nation my size. 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.