Jump to content

War Propaganda


Teddyyo

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1296382997' post='2610983']
Reich radio



[img]http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/9906/mushreich.jpg[/img]
[/quote]

Thanks for the free advertising.

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' timestamp='1296400822' post='2611120']
He does have a point. In fact I would love it if everybody did decide to create their own radio show.
[/quote]

Please, for the love of god this.

I take time out of my life, as do Hawk and Stormsend to do the show, time we could be doing other, possibly productive things with.

Infact, I encourage competition. I always have. Sadly no one is willing to put it on the line to do what we do.

Yes, that was a callout.

Edited by AirMe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Raider' timestamp='1296343186' post='2610058']
The funny thing is that even with all the alliances on us we've lost less NS then MK so far. Though I suppose that would be what happens when the combined strength of Planet Bob's worst fighters trys to mount an offensive.
[/quote]
It appears that you did not read the quote that was in the graph. One of your members stated that he/she was looking forward to more reps. Was it worth hoping for more reps while shredding your pixels?

Edited by HHAYD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='HHAYD' timestamp='1296403475' post='2611153']
It appears that you did not read the quote that was in the graph. One of your members stated that he/she was looking forward to more reps. Was it worth hoping for more reps while shredding your pixels?
[/quote]Is this the verbal propaganda thread, did I take a wrong turn?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Bionic redhead' timestamp='1296401636' post='2611129']
Are you seriously using the fact that a smaller alliance has less stuff as propaganda?
[/quote]

when we were at 70 members we had 50+ WRC..

We're still a 'smaller' alliance @ 92 members, so compare us vs you then understand our audit, especially on avgs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Raider' timestamp='1296343186' post='2610058']
The funny thing is that even with all the alliances on us we've lost less NS then MK so far. Though I suppose that would be what happens when the combined strength of Planet Bob's worst fighters trys to mount an offensive.
[/quote]

GOONS has lost about 1million NS, around 25% of their current NS.
MK has lost about 1 million NS, around 10% of their current NS.
These are of course rough approximations based on the NS charts, but I think it is clear.

Also, it is easier to lose NS when your ANS is 50k, as most of your nations are larger and getting nuked everyday, than when your ANS is 13k.

So either their offensive was good, or you're even worse than them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='lakerzz8' timestamp='1296413284' post='2611300']
GOONS has lost about 1million NS, around 25% of their current NS.
MK has lost about 1 million NS, around 10% of their current NS.
These are of course rough approximations based on the NS charts, but I think it is clear.

Also, it is easier to lose NS when your ANS is 50k, as most of your nations are larger and getting nuked everyday, than when your ANS is 13k.

So either their offensive was good, or you're even worse than them.
[/quote]

This post is a great example of why argumentum ad statisticum is a crappy idea. At no point do we see the context of why GOONS might be losing a lot of NS (namely that there are 9 alliances in wars with GOONS and nobody else, and their combined NS is around 21 million)

Cherry picked statistics can establish anything at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='acrux' timestamp='1296412711' post='2611290']
when we were at 70 members we had 50+ WRC..

We're still a 'smaller' alliance @ 92 members, so compare us vs you then understand our audit, especially on avgs.
[/quote]

Yeah but when you had 70 members you also had an ANS of about 140 million, which made getting all those lovely nukes, ships and military wonders that much easier :P .

Edited by Bionic redhead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Bionic redhead' timestamp='1296414480' post='2611327']
Yeah but when you had 70 members you also had an ANS of about 140 million, which made getting all those lovely nukes, ships and military wonders that much easier :P .
[/quote]

I don't often keep track of our stats, but I find it highly unlikely our ANS was ever 140 million.

Now, onto your point. It was actually much harder, with all our tech and WRCs military equipment like nukes and ships are actually far more pricey to both buy and upkeep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Lamuella' timestamp='1296414392' post='2611326']
This post is a great example of why argumentum ad statisticum is a crappy idea. At no point do we see the context of why GOONS might be losing a lot of NS (namely that there are 9 alliances in wars with GOONS and nobody else, and their combined NS is around 21 million)

Cherry picked statistics can establish anything at all.
[/quote]

LOL. You're joking right? I didn't claim that GOONs wasn't being attacked by a bunch of alliances. I was replying to a post that said GOONs has lost LESS NS than MK. I showed that that statement was false, both in terms of NS and % of total NS lost. You could see this because I quoted that post. Try reading again, buddy ;)

Edit: And the original post said that the reason they must have lost less than MK was because the alliances fighting them suck. So I said since the initial claim was false that they lost less NS, the follow-up claim must also be false...or simply that GOONs is even worse than them.

Edited by lakerzz8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Natan' timestamp='1296414742' post='2611330']
I don't often keep track of our stats, but I find it highly unlikely our ANS was ever 140 million.

Now, onto your point. It was actually much harder, with all our tech and WRCs military equipment like nukes and ships are actually far more pricey to both buy and upkeep.
[/quote]
Oh please, lets stop trying to compare Carpe Diem to Umbrella. First of all, trying to use the fact that WRCs increase the price of stuff as an example of how much harder Umbrella had it is ridiculous. That stuff does not actually cost all that much. Also, I think we all can acknowledge that Umbrella, since it was founded, was intended as a so-called "elite" alliance, whereas CD was not. Your ANS was most definitely much higher than CDs is, most likely to the point where most of your members had the necessary pre-requisites for a WRC. This is a retarded argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='BlackDragon' timestamp='1296408711' post='2611230']
[img]http://i371.photobucket.com/albums/oo151/Xerxer17/MKprop1.gif[/img]

[img]http://i371.photobucket.com/albums/oo151/Xerxer17/MKprop-1.gif[/img]

[img]http://i371.photobucket.com/albums/oo151/Xerxer17/MKprop.png[/img]
[/quote]

Thank you for reminding me of my Mario Sunshine playing days. ^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Sulmar' timestamp='1296418858' post='2611404']
Oh please, lets stop trying to compare Carpe Diem to Umbrella. First of all, trying to use the fact that WRCs increase the price of stuff as an example of how much harder Umbrella had it is ridiculous. That stuff does not actually cost all that much. Also, I think we all can acknowledge that Umbrella, since it was founded, was intended as a so-called "elite" alliance, whereas CD was not. Your ANS was most definitely much higher than CDs is, most likely to the point where most of your members had the necessary pre-requisites for a WRC. This is a retarded argument.
[/quote]

this shows how much you really dont know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...