Boom went the monkey

[Ogaden]

The thing most rogues forget to do is secure a uranium trade on the grey sphere

MOTU has this point covered, so +1 rogue points.

Edited January 15, 2010 by James Dahl

[Arcades057]

I have 22k tech....even sending out 300/cycle would take me forever. Plus it lowers my damage. I'd prefer damage output since I know I'll be DoWing an alliance when I go rogue, chances are I'll be picked up by said alliance for staggers after the first wave or so in which case it's no biggie to me who I'm hitting so long as they're in said alliance.

You're taking the short-term-damage-outcome route, which is more awesome due to numbers and the lowering of the average NS. But 20-25 days later it's over. I'm looking at long-term screwage of an alliance.

PM me when you're about to go on your rampage, maybe we can coordinate depending on the alliance you're hitting.

[LiquidMercury]

I just find it strange that he's attacking all out in the Air and Ground, and not evening throwing cruise missiles, even if he likes you why would he be doing aircraft attacks then?

Casualties are fun. Testing data is nice too.

[LiquidMercury]

You're taking the short-term-damage-outcome route, which is more awesome due to numbers and the lowering of the average NS. But 20-25 days later it's over. I'm looking at long-term screwage of an alliance.

PM me when you're about to go on your rampage, maybe we can coordinate depending on the alliance you're hitting.

20-25 days later I still would hve 20k+ tech, still be throwing nooks out and demolishing people with a severe tech advantage for me.

[ChairmanHal]

He's back though.

Really? Stealthy fellow he is.

[MOTU-Man]

Really? Stealthy fellow he is.

he is ram.. i told you

[grandeza]

God, how much I love this game.

[Loch Ness Monster]

You two should instead team up. You could get GGA to surrender to you and have your own alliance.

[LiquidMercury]

You two should instead team up. You could get GGA to surrender to you and have your own alliance.

I could get them to surrender to myself without Motu and he could without me I'd imagine. Though they have nobody in range for either of us.

[Prodigal Moon]

The thought of a single nation taking down an entire alliance fills my heart with glee. I've fantasized about going after a certain mid-sized alliance myself, but I know wouldn't be able to take their allies as well.

[Bob Janova]

But 20-25 days later it's over.

How do you figure that? After two cycles or so you'll be at or near ZI, having spent at most a billion, and with tiny bills ... maybe around $5m a day with military costs. If you start with 3bn as Motu did, that leaves you 2bn, and at $5m a day, that's 400 days.

Tech is a good thing since the damage bonus was introduced. Going rogue with a huge warchest, getting ZI'd quickly (particularly if you have a Colony wonder, which gives you 10,000 or so population even at ZI) and keeping on dropping those high tech nukes and airstrikes is the way to maximise damage.

And yes, I agree with you that once you're beaten down to mid range (with 10000 tech you'll still be 50k) you could pretty much destroy an alliance by attacking anyone who joined in your range. No-one wants to lose 400 or more infra and land a day for joining an alliance (6 nukes at 10k tech would take about 15k NS off you).

[Drai]

Casualties are fun. Testing data is nice too.

I know all about those. I got most of them while losing infra though

Out of curiosity what data are you testing with the aircraft? Success rates based on tech?

[LiquidMercury]

I know all about those. I got most of them while losing infra though

Out of curiosity what data are you testing with the aircraft? Success rates based on tech?

FSS viability, various success rates based on percentages, and success rates based on tech advantages.

also:

To: MOTU-Man From: LiquidMercury Date: 1/15/2010 11:58:37 PM

Subject: Nuclear Attack

Message: Your nation has been attacked with nuclear weapons by LiquidMercury. Your fallout shelters have limited the damage caused by this attack. You lost 39410 soldiers, 11044 defending tanks, 3 cruise missiles, 810.978 miles of land, 270.326 technology, 810.978 infrastructure, 50% of your aircraft, and 18% of your nuclear vulnerable navy force. In addition to these losses your nation will experience several days of economic devastation.

[Zero-One]

FSS viability, various success rates based on percentages, and success rates based on tech advantages.

also:

To: MOTU-Man From: LiquidMercury Date: 1/15/2010 11:58:37 PM

Subject: Nuclear Attack

Message: Your nation has been attacked with nuclear weapons by LiquidMercury. Your fallout shelters have limited the damage caused by this attack. You lost 39410 soldiers, 11044 defending tanks, 3 cruise missiles, 810.978 miles of land, 270.326 technology, 810.978 infrastructure, 50% of your aircraft, and 18% of your nuclear vulnerable navy force. In addition to these losses your nation will experience several days of economic devastation.

Ouch!!! That hurts!!! A week of war with you will completely demolish most nations on CN.

Miss you MOTU!! Come back when you're ready, brother.

[LoveaLot]

Aww man, why did u guys have to interfere in Motu's evil plans?

GO GO MOTU!

[Lord Boris]

FSS viability, various success rates based on percentages, and success rates based on tech advantages.

also:

To: MOTU-Man From: LiquidMercury Date: 1/15/2010 11:58:37 PM

Subject: Nuclear Attack

Message: Your nation has been attacked with nuclear weapons by LiquidMercury. Your fallout shelters have limited the damage caused by this attack. You lost 39410 soldiers, 11044 defending tanks, 3 cruise missiles, 810.978 miles of land, 270.326 technology, 810.978 infrastructure, 50% of your aircraft, and 18% of your nuclear vulnerable navy force. In addition to these losses your nation will experience several days of economic devastation.

Holy crap. You'd almost ZI me in one and a half weeks just with your nukes o.O

Edited January 16, 2010 by Lord Boris

[jer]

You're taking the short-term-damage-outcome route, which is more awesome due to numbers and the lowering of the average NS. But 20-25 days later it's over. I'm looking at long-term screwage of an alliance.

PM me when you're about to go on your rampage, maybe we can coordinate depending on the alliance you're hitting.

Republic of Roma carried out the type of plan you've described at the beginning of last year and spent over a month successfully nuking the lower ranks of the NPO with it, even though he was admittedly unprepared (he had a small amount of money to play with when starting out, can't remember exact numbers but I'm pretty sure it was under 100m). I remember seeing his NS graph towards the end of the conflict; it was completely flat, despite having numerous wars on the go. He also described in detail how he went about it and gave pretty much exactly the same advice you are giving here, in this thread. It would make interesting reading but it seems he edited out the guide a couple of months ago, oh well.

Used properly it could be devastating but you'd need to have it as a long-term goal because if you mindlessly hoard tech you're pretty much throwing away your chances of ever enacting such a plan. Someone with 20k tech is doomed to fighting away the warchest against large nations who by and large would not be afraid of war, so by relentlessly pursuing rankings and large one-off damaging hits they have sacrificed some of the impact on morale and overall alliance health that long-term roguery could have.

Edited January 16, 2010 by Aimee Mann

[LiquidMercury]

Republic of Roma carried out the type of plan you've described at the beginning of last year and spent over a month successfully nuking the lower ranks of the NPO with it, even though he was admittedly unprepared (he had a small amount of money to play with when starting out, can't remember exact numbers but I'm pretty sure it was under 100m). I remember seeing his NS graph towards the end of the conflict; it was completely flat, despite having numerous wars on the go. He also described in detail how he went about it and gave pretty much exactly the same advice you are giving here, in this thread. It would make interesting reading but it seems he edited out the guide a couple of months ago, oh well.

Used properly it could be devastating but you'd need to have it as a long-term goal because if you mindlessly hoard tech you're pretty much throwing away your chances of ever enacting such a plan. Someone with 20k tech is doomed to fighting away the warchest against large nations who by and large would not be afraid of war, so by relentlessly pursuing rankings and large one-off damaging hits they have sacrificed some of the impact on morale and overall alliance health that long-term roguery could have.

My way, I can get the shock and awe factor and possible an alliance surrender for the sheer damage output at the upper tier. Sure I may go to ZI but at ZI I'll still be 20k+ tech throwing around 700+ infra dmg nooks and that's something even most mid/top tier nations aren't going to want to eat. Being at ZI allows me to do it for a very very long time.

[WarriorConcept]

My way, I can get the shock and awe factor and possible an alliance surrender for the sheer damage output at the upper tier. Sure I may go to ZI but at ZI I'll still be 20k+ tech throwing around 700+ infra dmg nooks and that's something even most mid/top tier nations aren't going to want to eat. Being at ZI allows me to do it for a very very long time.

I wonder what would happen if you declared war on an alliance like GGA to be honest. I'd assume their allies would attack you right away, but that would only bring you down enough to where you could ravage them for a while.

[jer]

My way, I can get the shock and awe factor and possible an alliance surrender for the sheer damage output at the upper tier. Sure I may go to ZI but at ZI I'll still be 20k+ tech throwing around 700+ infra dmg nooks and that's something even most mid/top tier nations aren't going to want to eat. Being at ZI allows me to do it for a very very long time.

I think you are overestimating the impact of your sheer damage strategy because the victim nations in your plan are going to be veterans in reasonably high NS tiers who have already been around the block a few times are probably used to be being knocked around in various wars. Of course they won't be used to it to the extent of 700 infra per nuke... but many of them will have had experience of hard warfare before and won't be totally shocked or devastated by it.

New and inexperienced leaders on the other hand will be more traumatised by regular nukings, will ask for more aid for the war and rebuilding, will consider quitting their alliance or the game because they are fed up, etc, and new applicants would be harder to attract, so the overall impact on an alliance is bigger even though the damage outputs are smaller scale.

I also think no alliance will surrender to an individual rogue, no matter how you go about it, because there's too much pride at stake. Not to say that it wouldn't be fun trying, though

[LiquidMercury]

I wonder what would happen if you declared war on an alliance like GGA to be honest. I'd assume their allies would attack you right away, but that would only bring you down enough to where you could ravage them for a while.

Well GGA has no one in range. Also due to the military failure in the past by them, I would find it hilarious it they had to get all their allies to handle a rogue. Not many of their allies will have any in range either which still leads me to believe I'd get a surrender. Add in the fact that I currently have 22 other people promised to go rogue with me then I'd say things will go pretty well.

I think you are overestimating the impact of your sheer damage strategy because the victim nations in your plan are going to be veterans in reasonably high NS tiers who have already been around the block a few times are probably used to be being knocked around in various wars. Of course they won't be used to it to the extent of 700 infra per nuke... but many of them will have had experience of hard warfare before and won't be totally shocked or devastated by it.

New and inexperienced leaders on the other hand will be more traumatised by regular nukings, will ask for more aid for the war and rebuilding, will consider quitting their alliance or the game because they are fed up, etc, and new applicants would be harder to attract, so the overall impact on an alliance is bigger even though the damage outputs are smaller scale.

I also think no alliance will surrender to an individual rogue, no matter how you go about it, because there's too much pride at stake. Not to say that it wouldn't be fun trying, though

It has been my experience, that a lot of people in the top tier outside of citadel and Gre, are not so great at fighting (though there have been failures on cit/gre as well in the top tier, just % wise much lower). Everyone claims that we are the stat huggers but you don't see our large nations surrendering in wars, you see others doing so. Top tier nations also just don't get a lot of practice except during alliance war which I believe lends me a bit of a hand up as well due to my extensive play/writing of guides/general plan of going rogue and winning being put into play. Also when you're losing 15k+ NS in hard damages/day (hard damages being non-military NS) even that hurts a bit at the top.

As I said above, I've got 22 other fully prepared people promised to go rogue with me (and for the most part these people are not in citadel or gre and have much lower NS then myself so I'll still be fighting alone) which will give much more NS to play around with across all tiers. First I'd like to try and get the surrenders on my own though I suppose, since as you stated no individual rogue has gotten an alliance surrender though BK did get that one alliance to surrender but he had 2-3 other people with him iirc.

Edited January 16, 2010 by LiquidMercury

[Nizzle]

Oh LM I want to go rogue with you.

*dreamy eyes*

[WarriorConcept]

I also think no alliance will surrender to an individual rogue, no matter how you go about it, because there's too much pride at stake. Not to say that it wouldn't be fun trying, though

Ever heard of Ivan El Terrible?

Well GGA has no one in range. Also due to the military failure in the past by them, I would find it hilarious it they had to get all their allies to handle a rogue. Not many of their allies will have any in range either which still leads me to believe I'd get a surrender. Add in the fact that I currently have 22 other people promised to go rogue with me then I'd say things will go pretty well.

If you do decide to on against GGA let me know, if only because of the hilarity that would ensue.

[LiquidMercury]

Ever heard of Ivan El Terrible?

If you do decide to on against GGA let me know, if only because of the hilarity that would ensue.

Heh that I have and will do.

[Style #386]

Looks like MOTU isn't even attacking LM, so whats the point to this thread?

So I had to look to iFOK to find a shared observation, but pretty much this.

It seems that Reyne and Ramirus are the only two of the six that MOTU has bothered to attack. The other four are getting off on a glorified tech raid.