Best and Worst Military Alliances (2010 Edition)

[mrcalkin]

[quote name='Blue Lightning' timestamp='1283200749' post='2436077']
Umbrella also came in later but by that point the outcome was already beyond doubt.
[/quote]

We actually entered the fray on the 26th against Nueva Vida; your DoW on CnG was on the 28th.

i.e. we didn't switch because of the pre-empt; we were already actively supporting our allies prior to it.

Edited August 30, 2010 by mrcalkin

[Wilhelm the Demented]

Glad to see our reputation is still dismal.

I was disheartened when we were knocked out of the competition for WAE, but this has renewed my faith in our inability.

[Lusitan]

[quote name='mrcalkin' timestamp='1283204041' post='2436121']
We actually entered the fray on the 26th against Nueva Vida; your DoW on CnG was on the 28th.

i.e. we didn't switch because of the pre-empt; we were already actively supporting our allies prior to it.
[/quote]

You did fight us twice though

[quote name='KingEd' timestamp='1283199404' post='2436050']
Almost forgot WAPA. And like someone said below, they were ready to drop after like 4 days of fighting TFD, GUN, and NATO. Their members needed to grow a spine. I can only hope they did after their last performance. I mean to be honest, I was pissed. TPE chained like 4 treaties to help them only to find out that they weren't even Nuking. Individual nations had their only little deals to save their Infra/Tech and that got me pretty upset---it showed that WAPA had no control over their membership and the same goes for some members of TGE.

Point blank, there are a lot more "bad" militaries than there are good.
[/quote]

Well, in WAPA's defence, it made perfect sense for them to subscribe non-nuking agreements for a few simple reasons. First, NATO was outnumbered by many other alliances, so their main concern was ourselves and, to a minor extent, GUN. The big advantage (in this particular case) WAPA had was that they had ALOT of nations above 16k infra and we had none, being our larger nation with 14k infra or so. On the downside though, their warchests were simply terrible, with 14k infra nations having less than 2 million stored. Their tech levels were not too high either.

In essence, fighting WAPA was like fighting in the old days, the important goal was to thrown them into anarchy, at which point most would be incapable of fighting any further. To do that, and considering they had more nations and they were so much larger in infrastructure that we would have extreme dificulty, we could only find our way in by nuking. Which is why we refused the non-nuke agreement. Naturally this was a success for us due to WAPA's lack of preparation.

Had we made the blunder of accepting it, it would have been greatly to WAPA's advantage.

[Batallion]

[quote name='Teddyyo' timestamp='1283173941' post='2435727']
Yes, AcTi has Yew Gate. It has other Spartans too, as Batallion pointed out. We have former Viridians, former TOOL, former every alliance under the sun. These members don't fly the Spartan flag, nor VE flag, nor the TOOL flag. AcTi members fly the AcTi flag. They live and die for it. AcTi was renowned on SC because of the extent to which it was run like a [i]real[/i] clan, and under that philosophy, we prospered there. We believe it to be a recurring theme.
[/quote]

Teddy brilliance flows within you.

[Batallion]

[quote name='Aeternos Astramora' timestamp='1283154769' post='2435614']
Just like the 2010 Oscars go back to the dawn of film, right?

Don't blame us for making a poorly worded poll.
[/quote]

Okay stop being picky, you understand it now and I believe you can actually change your vote with this new poll system.

[MrMuz]

Why is RIA in the worst alliance list and NEW in the best alliance list?

Edited August 30, 2010 by MrMuz

[Rebounder]

For the best alliance poll, I looked at how much damage per capita each alliance punched with its back against the wall. NP, for example, was hell on Karma nations, but that's simply due to how large they were, and their military effort was not as concentrated as it should have been. I see a lot of votes for MK, but in NoCB MK folded fairly quickly compared to alliances like FAN and NPO, and in BiPolar MK needed more help to fight TOP than it should have needed. Therefore, I voted for FAN because they knocked NPO down efficiently when curbstomped, and they did win a two-year alliance war.

The worst fighting alliance was much harder. I considered Sparta and Wolfpack but ultimately voted MHA.

[Titus Pullo]

[quote name='Batallion' timestamp='1283207219' post='2436180']
Okay stop being picky, you understand it now and I believe you can actually change your vote with this new poll system.
[/quote]

Do we really?

People keep saying that it's "up until 2010"... Does that mean we should be basing our vote on the POV of December 31st, 2010?

[mhawk]

[quote name='KingEd' timestamp='1283199404' post='2436050']
The legendary Blitz indeed. In its origins it was all the rave, now we have wars launching 6 hours before update because people can't keep their mouth shut.




Almost forgot WAPA. And like someone said below, they were ready to drop after like 4 days of fighting TFD, GUN, and NATO. Their members needed to grow a spine. I can only hope they did after their last performance. I mean to be honest, I was pissed. TPE chained like 4 treaties to help them only to find out that they weren't even Nuking. Individual nations had their only little deals to save their Infra/Tech and that got me pretty upset---it showed that WAPA had no control over their membership and the same goes for some members of TGE.

Point blank, there are a lot more "bad" militaries than there are good.
[/quote]
TPF also put a few hundred nukes into WAPA as well

[Goldie]

[quote name='Lusitan' timestamp='1283197547' post='2436012']
Same thing with FoB and WAPA I believe. Not sure about FoB, but WAPA I am almost sure so.
[/quote]

WAPA was far and away the worst alliance on the SG side. They got thrashed so bad it pretty much necessitated VE coming in against TPF, less than two months removed from a total beatdown, because TPF and co was just sticking it to WAPA.

[Lusitan]

[quote name='mhawk' timestamp='1283211137' post='2436260']
TPF also put a few hundred nukes into WAPA as well
[/quote]

You only came in to take the second million NS they lost

[KingEd]

[quote name='mhawk' timestamp='1283211137' post='2436260']
TPF also put a few hundred nukes into WAPA as well
[/quote]

Yes now I remember. TPF was the one with the most wars I think on WAPA. That's why so many arrangements had to be made in order to keep WAPA from surrendering.

Edit---

You guys also raped their low tiers, many of whom didn't have Nukes to launch back. That was me during Karma war, and I know it sucks.


[quote name='goldielax25' timestamp='1283211517' post='2436266']
[b]WAPA was far and away the worst alliance on the SG side.[/b] They got thrashed so bad it pretty much necessitated VE coming in against TPF, less than two months removed from a total beatdown, because TPF and co was just sticking it to WAPA.
[/quote]

Sad but true. This is why I wasn't too thrilled when they joined AZTEC a few weeks/months ago. 1TF/NV/GLOF were fine on their own.

Edited August 31, 2010 by KingEd

[Hyperion321]

[quote name='KingEd' timestamp='1283212686' post='2436290']
That's why so many arrangements had to be made in order to keep WAPA from surrendering.
[/quote]
*shudders*

That's a few days during the war that I really don't want to remember...

[Lusitan]

[quote name='KingEd' timestamp='1283212686' post='2436290']
Yes now I remember. TPF was the one with the most wars I think on WAPA. That's why so many arrangements had to be made in order to keep WAPA from surrendering.
[/quote]

Well, we DoWed WAPA on February 6th, it might be understandable that by the time surrender talks started (February 20th), considering we were also fighting Ragnarok and Umbrella (since the 12th), we had already stopped launching any wars on WAPA

The problems during the surrender were due to exactly, and in my opinion, TPF not feeling [i]pressured[/i] enough to accept the "no re-entering clause" you were imposing. This because up until the 20th, TPF was only engaged against WAPA after having peaced out with some alliance prior to their DoW on WAPA. That is also why VE and Nueva Vida declared war on TPF right at the point we all exited the war and were bound by the "no re-entering clause". TPF didn't peace out exactly because they didn't want to sign the no re-entering clause. Which then changed a few days later when they ended up accepting it after feeling VE and NV's pressure.

EDIT: Of course, I am leaving out all the dance around the GOON reparations that was dragged the process for 8 hours XD

Edited August 31, 2010 by Lusitan

[Sandwich Controversy]

[quote name='Lusitan' timestamp='1283214154' post='2436306']
EDIT: Of course, I am leaving out all the dance around the GOON reparations that was dragged the process for 8 hours XD
[/quote]
NATO: "We will NEVER pay reparations!!!!"
TFD: "Fine, we'll do it for you."
LSF/UCN/ADI "Yeah, we're not paying either."
TFD: "OK geez we'll pay for you too."

Great time would do again A++++.

[Blue Lightning]

[quote name='Titus Pullo' timestamp='1283201989' post='2436091']
Ability is one thing, will is another. You may have 200 active, capable, and able fighters, however they are only useful if they have the will to fight and the morale to last. TOP accepting reparations in the previous war automatically disqualifies the alliance in my eyes given the pre-war attitude of the GA. Don't get me wrong, I think TOP performed admirably in spite of the situation, however there is such a disparity between the pre- and post- war attitudes that only give me the conclusion that TOP is lacking the will to be a military powerhouse.[/quote]
TOP has never lacked the will to fight hard and long, it's just not always the best thing to do in every situation. In the bipolar war, we were fighting a clearly loosing battle for very little reason and with nothing to gain from it continuing (and plenty to lose). Surrendering was the best choice in terms of the alliance's long term position and vitality. I really don't see how you can say that putting our long term interests ahead of continuing a pointless war is being weak willed.
[quote name='Titus Pullo' timestamp='1283201989' post='2436091']As for your second question: Do you honestly believe that any war in this planet we call Bob would truly be a one-on-one and stay that way? Especially during your prime...
[/quote]
It's a hypothetical question. Try to use your imagination.

[quote name='Hyperion321' timestamp='1283202907' post='2436105']
And that is where the grey area comes in for me, because TOP adopted similar attrition tactics to MK as MK did to NPO. When a war is all about nukes, and nukes are all about stats, then true fighting ability is very hard to determine. Anyone would be very hard pressed to determine where TOP's stats stopped working for them and where their skills started. I'm not saying that TOP doesn't have skills (the damage ratios from that war would disprove such a thing), but I simply can't say how big of a factor your tech was for your damage compared to your timing and ability.

Again, I'm not doubting TOP's skills, I've just never seen them in an offensive position that required any large scale effort (You guys practically walked through Karma and NoCB, and never participated in UJW) or a defensive position that wasn't centered around damage output rather than total victory. So, really all I'm saying is I just don't know how good you guys [i]really[/i] are when you go all out, and I've never seen you go all out in combat because...well...you never had to. Maybe one war we'll see TOP goes balls deep into somebody and we'll get to see how good you really are.

If Umbrella had more members, I believe they would have the best shot out of anyone. They have the activity, the skills, and the slot usage to take pretty much anyone down. But alas, exclusivity comes at the cost of coverage area.
[/quote]
I think both we and MK were at the height of our powers at the start of the bipolar war (I doubt MK are stronger now than they were pre-war, but I haven't compared the stats). Back then we had such a massive statistical advantage over MK, I think even the most incompetent players could have beaten MK in a one on one. I have a lot of respect for MK and they were definitely the toughest alliance I've ever fought, but they just didn't have the tech, wonders or sheer member count for them to have stood much of a chance against us. As for Umbrella, I'm not sure when their prime was or how big they were but either way, they have always been a lot smaller than we were in our prime. They are both definitely among the best pound for pound fighters around though, especially Umbrella.

Both MK and Umbrella should know our military capability very well, since one was among our closest allies for several years and the other faced us at the peak of our power. I doubt many within either alliance would say they would win a 1 on 1 against us in our prime.

[quote name='mrcalkin' timestamp='1283204041' post='2436121']
We actually entered the fray on the 26th against Nueva Vida; your DoW on CnG was on the 28th.

i.e. we didn't switch because of the pre-empt; we were already actively supporting our allies prior to it.
[/quote]
Yeah, think I got a bit mixed up there. Sorry.

[Lenny N Karl]

[quote name='Sandwich Controversy' timestamp='1283214379' post='2436310']
NATO: "We will NEVER pay reparations!!!!"
TFD: "Fine, we'll do it for you."
LSF/UCN/ADI "Yeah, we're not paying either."
TFD: "OK geez we'll pay for you too."

Great time would do again A++++.
[/quote]

yet another false and misleading statement.... NATO paid it's part. Would be nice to see veterans like yourself take the high road at least once. I honestly feel bad for you and how things in your life must be to act this way all the time.





[i]Those who are free of resentful thoughts surely find peace.
-Buddha[/i]

[Lusitan]

[quote name='Sandwich Controversy' timestamp='1283214379' post='2436310']
NATO: "We will NEVER pay reparations!!!!"
TFD: "Fine, we'll do it for you."
LSF/UCN/ADI "Yeah, we're not paying either."
TFD: "OK geez we'll pay for you too."

Great time would do again A++++.
[/quote]


Just for the pleasure of correcting you

[quote]*TFD, NATO, GUN, ADI, LSN, and LSF Surrender to the forces fighting them.
*TFD, NATO, GUN, ADI, LSN, and LSF Agree to not re-enter on any front pertaining to the remaining parties at war or initial combatants.
*TFD, NATO, and GUN Agree to not aid those in the war.
*TFD & NATO will pay $500million in reparations to FoB.
*TFD will pay $50 million to GOONS on behalf of NATO.
*NATO/LSF will pay $125 million to GOONS but paid fully by NATO.
*ADI will pay $75million to GOONS.[/quote]

EDIT: Still no idea where you picked UCN in that

Edited August 31, 2010 by Lusitan

[KingEd]

[quote name='Lusitan' timestamp='1283214154' post='2436306']
EDIT: Of course, I am leaving out all the dance around the GOON reparations that was dragged the process for 8 hours XD
[/quote]

Don't remind me. That will probably be the first and last peace talks I lead. However, I will admit, it had its hilarious moments. From WAPA demanding reps to someone from GOONS saying what he said. It was honestly, to die for. I retract my previous statement, I wish to be involved in all future peace talks.

[quote name='Sandwich Controversy' timestamp='1283214379' post='2436310']
NATO: "We will NEVER pay reparations!!!!"
TFD: "Fine, we'll do it for you."
LSF/UCN/ADI "Yeah, we're not paying either."
TFD: "OK geez we'll pay for you too."

Great time would do again A++++.
[/quote]

Something along these lines....It was a $%&@-fest really. Now a question: Do all peace talks last an entire day ? (In this case over 10 hours).

[HisK Owns You]

[quote name='lonewolfe2015' timestamp='1283182581' post='2435826']
He was kicked out of Sparta for failing to fight in every major war they had ever been in. So the precedent is there to believe he will continue to be another hippy playing cowboy.
[/quote]

You can't get into Ronin if you do that. No matter how big you are.

[Goldie]

[quote name='Lusitan' timestamp='1283214154' post='2436306']
The problems during the surrender were due to exactly, and in my opinion, TPF not feeling [i]pressured[/i] enough to accept the "no re-entering clause" you were imposing. This because up until the 20th, TPF was only engaged against WAPA after having peaced out with some alliance prior to their DoW on WAPA. That is also why VE and Nueva Vida declared war on TPF right at the point we all exited the war and were bound by the "no re-entering clause". TPF didn't peace out exactly because they didn't want to sign the no re-entering clause. Which then changed a few days later when they ended up accepting it after feeling VE and NV's pressure.
[/quote]

That was the whole point of VE's entry on half a dozen fronts. We targeted alliances who didn't want to surrender/were putting out a good amount of damage and basically sat on their heads for a day or two until they realized they needed to surrender. Very fun times, I simultaneously had a war with someone in USN, someone in TPF, and someone in Argent.

[Titus Pullo]

[quote name='KingEd' timestamp='1283219915' post='2436446']
Now a question: Do all peace talks last an entire day ? (In this case over 10 hours).
[/quote]

No.

[Lusitan]

[quote name='Titus Pullo' timestamp='1283222462' post='2436488']
No.
[/quote]

We did have approximatelly 30 alliances in the same room though

[adzzz]

[quote name='mrcalkin' timestamp='1283191108' post='2435914']
lol, someone's a little bit butthurt about not getting his protectorate I guess. Expected but I wonder how many times you've actually witnessed us fight?
[/quote]

thts not the case at all.

Best = Ragnarok for their effort on NSO
Worst = RIA

[Titus Pullo]

[quote name='Lusitan' timestamp='1283223681' post='2436512']
We did have approximatelly 30 alliances in the same room though
[/quote]

It certainly does get complicated once you get more than three or four alliances. Even more so if one or two of the alliances are egotistical (e.g. Ramlins).