CnG vs TOP: who will win?

[LegendoftheSkies]

Clearly The Corporation shall win this war.

[avernite]

Slipping into peacemode and rebuying is actually less effective than remaining out of peacemode and rebuying 2 nukes per day in terms of total number of launched nukes over a given time period, actually. Once get down to the bottom of the barrel, you can buy and launch, meaning no one will be able to spy the nukes away. You also have the protection of the Silo for most of your nations at those low levels. Slipping into peace mode just means all of the "no nuke will hit" days get used up first and then are followed by a week of straight nuking which thanks to the spying going on, will mean you average fewer hits in the full cycle than you would have if you had just sat there and kept going with your hit and miss strategy.

That ignores the fact that peacemode allows you to pick one to three targets yourself.

[Sephiroth]

What I'd like to see it end in is white peace after both sides have fun letting loose, but I don't want to see harsh terms imposed on either.

I'm not convinced our allies have abandoned us, so I'll place my bets on us. On the TOP-C&G front I think there will be lots of destruction and TOP won't surrender, so it could drag out for a while. C&G is going to take heavy damage in their upper tiers, could end up in a situation where most of TOP's nations are out of range eventually and C&G avg NS drops very low.

[Utracia]

GPA will win of course, after the warring alliances blow each other up they'll be that much closer to regaining the #1 spot

[Denial]

We had plenty of reasons to attack.

No, I don't see any valid reasons for attacking an entire bloc and creating an entirely new war with absolutely no justification provided besides your own paranoia.

[Jinnai]

GRL will win.

[Titus Pullo]

TOP already violated Cit by attacking MK, whom Umbrella is treatied to.

Citadel was broken many times during Karma, and not by TOP. However, TOP still did what it could without breaching any of its treaties. It is clear that Lux is worthless and has been for months now.

To be clear:

---Umbrella declared war on Zenith, an MDoAP partner of Old Guard (who was still in Citadel) since September 2008.

---Gremlins declared war on IRON, an MDP partner of The Order of the Paradox since July 3rd, 2007.

Edit: Oh wow, this thing is 7 pages long. I had no idea... Oh well, my comment still stands though it may have previously been covered.

Edited January 31, 2010 by Titus Pullo

[Delta1212]

That ignores the fact that peacemode allows you to pick one to three targets yourself.

I didn't say there weren't other reasons for using that strategy, just that it doesn't actually help in terms of ability to launch more nukes.

[Feanor Noldorin]

No, I don't see any valid reasons for attacking an entire bloc and creating an entirely new war with absolutely no justification provided besides your own paranoia.

Heh, by all means, keep telling yourself that.

[Denial]

Heh, by all means, keep telling yourself that.

Tell me then, what is the justification for hitting an entire bloc that was entirely uninvolved in any prior conflict? If you had valid reasoning, why is it not present in your declaration of war? If you had justification, why has Crymson summarised your casus belli as TOP feeling "threatened" by Complaints & Grievances?

[Titus Pullo]

Tell me then, what is the justification for hitting an entire bloc that was entirely uninvolved in any prior conflict? If you had valid reasoning, why is it not present in your declaration of war? If you had justification, why has Crymson summarised your casus belli as TOP feeling "threatened" by Complaints & Grievances?

Probably because it wouldn't matter if he stated the casus belli or not, CnG would have been whining about it no matter. TOP was always seen as the ebil alliance whose actions were always wrong, why would this declaration be any different?

[Sephiroth]

TOP already violated Cit by attacking MK, whom Umbrella is treatied to.

Gre and FCC hit IRON in the Karma War violating that clause, TOP ended up sticking with Citadel anyways in that war and forgave both Gre and FCC. There was much talk of removing that clause and everyone pretty much agreed it wasn't a good clause, although laziness prevailed.

Edit: Also C&G repeating a lie over and over doesn't make it true. I remember a certain Dictator believed that if you keep repeating something false over and over again, then people will believe it regardless of the truth. While it can work in some situations, to many people know the truth for it to be effective here.

Edited January 31, 2010 by Methrage

[Denial]

Probably because it wouldn't matter if he stated the casus belli or not, CnG would have been whining about it no matter. TOP was always seen as the ebil alliance whose actions were always wrong, why would this declaration be any different?

So, because we would debate with our opponents regarding an aggressive attack, it was deemed sensible to exclude any justification for this entirely new war altogether? Genius.

Still waiting for those valid reasons to attack C&G.

Edit: Also C&G repeating a lie over and over doesn't make it true. I remember a certain Dictator believed that if you keep repeating something false over and over again, then people will believe it regardless of the truth. While it can work in some situations, to many people know the truth for it to be effective here.

What great truth would that be?

Edited January 31, 2010 by Denial

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='Denial' date='30 January 2010 - 10:41 PM' timestamp='1264909278' post='2146440']
So, because we would debate with our opponents regarding an aggressive attack, it was deemed sensible to exclude any justification for this entirely new war altogether? Genius.

Still waiting for those valid reasons to attack C&G.


What great truth would that be?
[/quote]
So your saying if someone declared on Stickmen you wouldn't of assisted and that was a pointless treaty? Would C&G of been neutral in the war had TOP\IRON not attacked?

[Denial]

[quote name='Methrage' date='31 January 2010 - 01:44 PM' timestamp='1264911291' post='2146517']
So your saying if someone declared on Stickmen you wouldn't of assisted and that was a pointless treaty? Would C&G of been neutral in the war had TOP\IRON not attacked?
[/quote]
Vanguard already possessed a treaty link to Stickmen via our long-held MDOAP with SLCB, who were our protectorate before that.

Again, what great truth are you speaking of?

[Earogema]

[quote name='Feanor Noldorin' date='30 January 2010 - 07:55 PM' timestamp='1264902907' post='2146166']
Heh, by all means, keep telling yourself that.
[/quote]
You know, for an alliance that wants to encourage debate, you're not very encouraging

[Bob Janova]

[quote name='Denial' date='31 January 2010 - 02:13 AM' timestamp='1264904027' post='2146207']
Tell me then, what is the justification for hitting an entire bloc that was [b]entirely uninvolved in any prior conflict[/b]? If you had valid reasoning, why is it not present in your declaration of war? If you had justification, why has Crymson summarised your [i]casus belli[/i] as TOP feeling "threatened" by Complaints & Grievances?
[/quote]
Lie is bolded for your convenience.

[Sephiroth]

[quote name='Denial' date='31 January 2010 - 12:02 AM' timestamp='1264914168' post='2146671']
Vanguard already possessed a treaty link to Stickmen via our long-held MDOAP with SLCB, who were our protectorate before that.

Again, what great truth are you speaking of?
[/quote]
You don't answer any of the questions since you know you can be proven wrong then, instead you bring up something different and keep repeating the same meaningless question. I might as well not be talking to a person since the response are irrelevant anyways.

The truth is you had already chosen a side and were coordinating before TOP declared on C&G. You guys keep repeating that C&G hadn't chosen a side before then in hopes that repeating the same lie will drown out the truth. All people need to do is read back in the forum some when the war was starting up and expanding to see many posts with C&G members admitting to being on the other side and general posturing.

[Vespassianus]

If you ask for winner you should give a definition for what is winning and who is the winner.

In a full scale nuclear war with 11k nukes versus 22k nukes it's just about making damage and suffering even more damage. The real winners are the outside parties or the not so heavily involved alliances.

C&G would probably loose their top tier who are in war mode, TOP side would just get dogpiled and forced to sit on the sidelines.

[Prime minister Johns]

If CnG wins it will be at a terrible cost.
TOP will inflict massive losses in this scenario and CnG will take months to recover.

And if TOP wins then TOP will be in a similar position.

I can see this war as being mutually destructive with no clear benefit for the victor regardless of who they are. A minimum of ~10k nukes is most likely going to be dropped onto the victorious power in the course of this war if it is allowed to play out to the bitter end.

[Godwin]

[quote name='Prime minister Johns' date='31 January 2010 - 10:50 AM' timestamp='1264953036' post='2147630']
If CnG wins it will be at a terrible cost.
TOP will inflict massive losses in this scenario and CnG will take months to recover.

And if TOP wins then TOP will be in a similar position.

I can see this war as being mutually destructive with no clear benefit for the victor regardless of who they are. A minimum of ~10k nukes is most likely going to be dropped onto the victorious power in the course of this war if it is allowed to play out to the bitter end.
[/quote]

Quoted for truth. There is no "winner" in a war like this, except perhaps everyone else who wasn't involved.

I forsee a massive drop in NS/Score for both sides, possibly even to the point where a sanction is lost... Though maybe not, looking at the huge gap.

[Instr]

Cyber Nations as a whole will win. By the end of this war, the playing field will be leveled for all alliances, and we'll have seen the complete destruction of both the ex-NPO bloc and the ex-Karma blocs.

[LiquidMercury]

[quote name='Instr' date='31 January 2010 - 11:50 AM' timestamp='1264960220' post='2147858']
Cyber Nations as a whole will win. By the end of this war, the playing field will be leveled for all alliances, and we'll have seen the complete destruction of both the ex-NPO bloc and the ex-Karma blocs.
[/quote]

That was my plan all along.

I really just wanted a new sig:

Hegemony - Defeated
Frostbite - Defeated
SF - Defeated
CnG - Defeated
Citadel - Defeated
Hegemony again - Defeated
LiquidMercury - Victorious

Mua hahaha. On a more serious note, this is beneficial for all as it decreases the disparity between top and bottom alliances. It puts a bit of a reset button on the game (though I still encourage admin to uncap GRL). Seriously though, I just wanted cheaper moon wonders.

[Jack Diorno]

TOP can't win, they have no low tier nations and only a few mid tier nations. At the very best they could somehow push all of our top tier nations out of range or have them remain in peace mode at a cost of losing almost all of their own nations down into the swarm of C&G's substantial mid tier, where they wont return from.
C&G's middle tier will be able to weather the damage easily enough, we have a massive numerical advantage there in terms of raw nations and most C&G alliances have been pushing for increased warchests and tech imports since the karma war, in case of the worst scenario arising which it almost did.
When TOP only has the very large nations left and nobody in range they have lost, they wouldn't be able to enforce anything upon us, where as C&G could attack their allies and the nations that dropped into regular range.

All that said, I've seen the spy reports and TOP's warchests aren't anything spectacular. The nations I've spied on in my range 50-60K actually seem to have substanially smaller warchests then expected and will probably become useless meatbags after this cycle of war.

[Bob Janova]

[quote]At the very best they could somehow push all of our top tier nations out of range or have them remain in peace mode[/quote]
That's a win. Top tier supremacy is definitely a victory condition in my book.