Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 04/18/18 in all areas

  1. Here is my version of the complete war stats, including the final war stats for Nuke bloc vs. TKR/Guardian/TC/GoB. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CUQB4ffrWnCEQWcKz5lewRzsRK4HRfFwyjkt_eTfh9U/edit?usp=sharing The market prices used are: food=110, coal=3638, oil=3328, uranium=2995, lead=3641, iron=3765, bauxite=3075, gasoline=3720, munitions=2125, steel=4598, aluminium=2943 based on average market prices for the past 45 days. Infrastructure damage value is calculated similar to Frawley's but should take into account the rebuying of infrastructure as well. The way it works is like this: for each attack in each war, the time is recorded, as well as who the attacker and defender are for that particular attack. According to the score graph breakdown on the defender's nation page, the infrastructure level for the latest date and time before the attack is calculated, and divided by the amount of cities at that time (also from the score chart) to find the average infrastructure per city. The cost of the infrastructure is calculated using the same method as in the infrastructure cost calculator with the starting infrastructure given as the maximum of (average infra per city - infrastructure destroyed in the attack) or 0, and the ending infrastructure as the maximum of either infrastructure destroyed, or the average infra per city. Military unit values are calculated at cost, including missile and nuclear weapon costs. Loot values include victory and alliance bank loots. I haven't organised the data for each individual nation like Leo did in his thread, but the sheet with all the raw data is available so you can filter by your nation ID to find that out. The alliance ID of alliances not listed on the final page (that go in the 'other' category) is also available in the raw data. It includes references to each war by the war ID so you can also check to make sure it's correct. I've done some random manual checks to make sure all the data is valid for each war, but if you find any errors please let me know, or let me know if some wars are missing. The only wars that shouldn't have been included are ones against nations that have deleted, the alliance no longer exists or against someone not in an alliance. EDIT: These stats do not include the cost of infrastructure destroyed in beige (% of each city). See the final stats here which do, and also don't include missile and nuke costs: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1r-J36mxxj68T7XerTqk9arR5rAxeVs0HdSOfch19wDo/edit?usp=sharing
    25 points
  2. Can't wait for the next one in 2020.
    24 points
  3. As you know, I have dedicated my life to finding out the truth behind the politics of Orbis. Now I have made two new discoveries, that I share with you all now. Nothing that you know is true, join me in uncovering the secrets of this world (and new meme formats) And this one will be no surprise to the most woke war stats folks!
    18 points
  4. Orange Defense Network To all, I've been getting a lot of questions regarding ODN's war status, so I felt some clarification was needed. On the 24th of March, the Golden Horde hit ODN. From our perspective for no reason, from theirs for a variety of reasons. They claimed we were part of this "IQ" coalition. C'est la vie though, that's life. We were attacked by the Horde. They called the attack a 'mass raid,' but as far as ODN was concerned, this was and remained a war. Multiple waves of attacks sending us to beige and then happening again and again are not a 'raid' in our book. We don't mind dealing with raids, we have lots of respect for raiders. This was not a raid as far as we were concerned (they are welcome to call it what they want). They told us the only way the attacks would end, would be if we cancelled our treaties with NPO. Well no thank you. The day anyone but ODN dictates who ODN can and cannot call friend will be a cold day in hell. In all honesty, besides from apparently our friends in NPO we couldn't even tell you who is in IQ. Certainly we dont consider ourselves in it. I'm sure they are fine folks, and we've got the utmost respect for NPO, but we had no interest in joining the global war and anyone who talked to us could have figured that out. As such, just because the global war has ended, *OUR* war with the Golden Horde has NOT ended. Just as we never intended to go to war with IQ, nor do we intend to declare peace with the Golden Horde simply because a bunch of random other alliances declared peace. Especially not considering how this whole thing started. We are under no delusions. The Golden Horde is bigger than us. They are more experienced then us. They outnumber us. We were attacked when we weren't expecting it and that hit us hard. We have limited resources. I suspect that for every 1 million of damage we do to the Horde, they will do 10 million to us. That's fine. We'll make that trade gladly, week after week. But we will deal damage. And we will not give in. They can smash us into a bloody pulp, crack our skulls, break every bone in our body. Our teeth will still be lodged firmly in their flesh at the end of it. ::Grins:: if nothing else, this will be a nice lesson on ODN's character for the rest of the world. I'm sure there are plenty out there who are better nation builders. Better with war mechanics. More experienced. But we're an ornery stubborn bunch of asses when you rile us up. I suspect TGH will get to see that first hand. There's nothing personal with this. I am looking forward to a long and good war with TGH. Most of them have been fine opponents so far. If I need to be reduced to a smoking pile of rubble, I am glad they will be the ones doing it! But in ODN we have a code of honor we live by. And the real test of such a code is not in easy times, but when facing overwhelming odds. So for everyone asking.... yes ODN considers itself at war with TGH. No we are not peaceing out because IQ did. Yes we intend to have a lot of fun with them on the battlefield. No this war won't be ending anytime soon, no matter how hopeless it is, not until *we* are satisfied that we've gotten what we need.
    17 points
  5. 6 months where most of the game can't attack each other. Brilliant.
    16 points
  6. MEAT IS BACK ON THE MENU BOYS
    14 points
  7. I remember when we vehemently shit on the idea of a 6 month NAP because it was too long. Man, those were the days. Too bad they're far gone.
    14 points
  8. 12 points
  9. The Iron Curtain falls as Stratagem annexes another Soviet satellite, The Communist International. Will Queen Stalin ever stop?
    11 points
  10. Since people are complaining about the 6-month NAP and the stagnation of the game, I'm looking forward to all the non-participants starting something up in the near future! As for those who fought in the war, it was good (and sometimes painful) fun while it lasted.
    10 points
  11. Ooh, what's this? A bonus! This one's for @Abbas Mehdi
    10 points
  12. This isn't really a post worth dumping on. We all claim to want dynamism but when an alliance actually does do something outside of the norm, from a position of weakness no less, they get shit on.
    9 points
  13. Let's look at the positive side of a majority of the game agreeing not to fight each other for 6 months: Alliances can cut expenses by getting rid of their milcom departments @Alex The next half of a year will be the perfect time to change/update the war mechanics, since nobody will be having any wars PnW can change it's name to the much cleaner and concise title "Politics... sorta" Less fighting will give us more time to find a new hobby to replace this one
    9 points
  14. Suffering with irl stuff Gib Coca Cola and meme production will continue
    9 points
  15. Let's put it in a different perspective. A lot of the critics of the 6mo NAP, could've helped tip the scales to reduce that term, or they had indirectly effected the war by hitting some supporters (IE: NB getting hit, when NB was initially on the supporting side against IQ). Other than that, this war could've easily gone another month or two months before a clear outcome would be established. The war mechanics nowadays makes it really hard to force surrenders, but IQ did have an advantage with their numbers and Air superiority. If a war was to be tilted to who would win, it'd involve one side having to drastically change their strategy. Our side went with a more guerilla warfare once we lost out on the Air, and they kept up with the Air strat. Any changes to those would've easily involved more resources being drained. So with that said, war could've easily lasted longer. Then after that a 3mo NAP, which is par for the course with most wars. So you're looking at roughly 4-5mos right there. This is a 6mo NAP. So it basically evens out when it comes to it.
    7 points
  16. Does that mean those alliances spelled incorrectly in the OP are allowed to start new wars? Like "The United Empire of Zaharon" or "Principlality of Zeon"?
    7 points
  17. Sneaky Smith, trying to persaude alliances to remove their milcom departments so TKR can come in and roll them all.
    7 points
  18. Well again. We dont consider ourselves part of IQ. We keep saying that, and it doesn't seem to sink in. Maybe this will help. Hell you said 'help your allies in the future, including NPO' but we dont HAVE any allies besides NPO. We're out here on our own on this one ::grins::. That means we have no support to help us, but it also means we are beholden to no one else. Hell, after NPO the alliance we admire the most would probably be Arrgh and we have no ties to them. And why do this? It has to do with why we exist as an alliance. To us its not about global politics or nation building. Again, it may not be the 'right' way to play compared to most alliances... but we aren't most alliances. We care far more for what we view as right and wrong, our code of honor, being able to look ourselves in the mirror.... all that far more for that than we do our stats. Everyone SAYS that. Everyone SAYS "if you mess with us we will war for months." We intend to LIVE it. Words are cheap. Actions show your character. If we let you just hit us for the reasons you did and then rolled over, it wouldn't say anything bad about TGH's character. But it sure as hell would about ODNs. Speaking purely personally, what do *I* want from this war? 1) You all will never admit it publicly. But when I look in your eyes, I want into your heart-of-hearts to know you are going "Yeah, it was probably stupid of us to hit ODN when they were sitting this war out." 2) More importantly, right now I don't sense or feel any particular respect from you all to us. That's fine. Respect has to be earned. By the time this is done, I suspect that (again, even if you won't admit it) your eyes will tell me a different story. ::Grins:: I want you to be going "damn those ODNers may not be xyz.... but they are some crazy ******" You don't have to like us. Think us brilliant fighters. Or savy players. But I *WILL* see that you respect our commitment, integrity, and resilience. And if you don't we will keep fighting till you do. 3) Most importantly. This is more than anything else about *ourselves*. We arent fighting to make you surrender (though you are welcome to surrender to us!) We are fighting for *ourselves*. We don't like how this war happened.... and we wouldn't like what it said about us if we rolled over on it. We see this as an internal test of our character. Can we go the distance. Most importantly at all, this war will end when we can look at ourselves and say "we satisfied our honor. We handled ourselves well. We put EVERYTHING on the battlefield. There wasn't an ounce more effort we could give. Not a dollar more damage we could squeeze out, not a day more we could struggle on. This is our best." I don't care what that is in total damage. Just that we know there isn't an OUNCE left to wring from ourselves. We want to go to that final limit. And we want to see what that limit is. And we want to surpass our expectations of ourselves. Corny? Maybe. Stupid? Could be. But the world would be boring if every alliance in it just did the "standard" "smart" move. ::grins:: Welcome to ODN land.
    6 points
  19. Anyone who put their names to this is pathetic. And anyone balking about the duration after signing the last global NAP probably ought to reflect on the precedent they set.
    6 points
  20. Finally... A knight themed alliance!
    6 points
  21. Official Disbandment thread: RIP House Tyrone 3/25/18-4/17/18
    5 points
  22. Hi, we're The Golden Horde. Let me introduce you to our Foreign Affairs Khan, @Settra. He'll get you acquainted with how we do things here. My 2nd-in-Command, you should recognize him from past prized topics that center around Dynamism, that's @Sketchy. We also have wonderful members, such as @Justin076, who take the time to really get involved with the community here. With that said, one of our goals here in The Golden Horde as a bunch of hungry conflict-driven Mongols, is to really get people involved through any manner possible. I'd say that so far we've been reaching our goals, whether people have enjoyed our antics or not. Now we just got out of a major war, which was really fun honestly, and we worked alongside with some friends and allies, and I told them that if they were to reach peace, then we'll go along with it too. I didn't want to abandon them and I wanted the people to feel that we were truly there for them. That's always a good way to establish good PR for an alliance. However, we see that an alliance didn't quite agree to peace and, while (un)fortunate.... Ah hell. SADDLE UP THE HORSES BOYS AND NOTCH THE ARROWS, LETS GO
    5 points
  23. frick you Kastor, Optional Defense Network must continue on!
    5 points
  24. You/CoS have never fought a war in your entire history. All you do is shit talk everyone else. You literally contribute nothing to the game anymore. So please, don’t say things like this when you do nothing. Would require TKR to do anything that wasn’t easy and handed to them. Would also need to use others as meatshields.
    5 points
  25. You know, I didn't particularly care about how long the NAP was, but now I'm glad that 6 months was accepted, because this salt is wonderful Since this option was so bad, I guess all the non-IQ people who fought in the war should've rejected it....or kept fighting to try and get better terms....or given another counteroffer.....or you know, not accepted it. But devious IQ got into their heads and forced them to do it guys! They're the real victims, Roq and his mind control are a threat to us all! Also good war overall, it was fun.
    4 points
  26. I was expecting a post like this when we declared and it never came smh
    4 points
  27. I didn't mean to counter anything. I'm just saying that since some people (including non-participants) see this as a move towards stagnation and are actively bashing it (and I agree 6 months can seem long), I can expect them to actively try start something up. Is that an unfair assumption to make? Those in the war actually committed a lot of time and effort to fight it, so I'm not going to bash those who were involved in the war. And last time I heard, even with a 3-month NAP Orbis had no wars for more than 6 months. Also, I don't think your TKR comment makes any sense. But okay I guess.
    4 points
  28. Thanks to all sides, IQ and non-IQ for interesting war. I'm proud that I might to fight for IQ. Fighting against Rose, Golden Horde, AIM and KT was a great pleasure for me, you are a good fighters (especially AIM). Ayyy lmao. BK STRONK.
    4 points
  29. Marginally better than a 3 month war that accomplishes nothing, but a six month NAP is ridiculously excessive. 90 days would have been plenty, 60 would have been ideal. Now the only fun to be had is placing bets on who merges into BK next.
    4 points
  30. "Strong leftist," dude, that's an oxy moron.
    4 points
  31. What is exactly not accurate according to you? Frawley’s stats and this set of stats can’t match because he took steel something around 5000 ppu, if I am wrong there please correct me. These stats are taking steel at 3500 ppu. So if you know some maths you should be able to understand how values can vary. Units lost/destroyed are taken directly from the API provided by the game, so it should be completely accurate. I will say once again that infrastructure damage is directly taken from in-game Stats Tracker, which is known to provide unreliable data in some cases. I would like to point out how said tool has been used before for other conflicts and it was well accepted by then. There is no data provided by the game to calculate or ‘get’ infrastructure data 100% accurate, which is why the Stat Tracker has been used as it also is impartial, miscalculations are for everyone regardless of alliance affiliation. I can only grant you the issue with people deleting or leaving alliances fighting are not included there. Other than that it is you trying to deny what is obvious. You are likely to be in disadvantage when Frawley releases his stats, I cannot wait for the arguments you will make up to try keep painting you still as ‘winning’ by then. I will have fun quoting all of you.
    4 points
  32. Surely you guys can at least recognize the irony in all the accusations flying around that the non-IQ side is trying to spin facts in their favor and use their own biased metrics....by comparing BKs stats to NPOs. It isn't like Keegoz made his own stat sheet and we are comparing information from one side against the other, in which case both have potential incentive to massage the stats. Instead we have one side deliberately change its calculations to dramatically shift the damages (past and present) in their favor, from how they previously tallied it. Maybe Leos method is just more accurate than Frawleys, though much of this thread indicates very strongly otherwise. But even the most die-hard BK-stat supporter has to realize how this looks....
    4 points
  33. If your stats weren't wrong, then it wouldn't be propaganda.
    4 points
  34. You must be ex-NPO to buy into that propaganda piece. It's hilarious watching you IQ folk remain so insular, it's like watching the downfall of Sparta in real time. Unlike Sparta, however, IQ has yet to win a real war
    4 points
  35. no sigs on the OP, fake peace, keep fighting boys and girls!
    3 points
  36. Yeah, 6mo NAP sucks, but hey - this war would've continued on for another month or so due to the strategies employed. It was a interesting war. Showed that you can't really pin nations down anymore, or it's much harder now. Back in the past it was easy to pin nations down and force a surrender. Now you'd have to get creative.
    3 points
  37. 6 month NAP is whack. Frig IQ for that dumb shit. See your asses on October 18th.
    3 points
  38. It was fun whilst it lasted.
    3 points
  39. Your name is not even a proper noun! It is no surprise someone who is not a proper noun does not know what a pronoun or what correct statistics may look like.
    3 points
  40. 3 points
  41. Upon arrival in his office, Emiliano Cabrera, First Minister of the Republic of Aguacenta received the following communique: FROM THE FRENCH FOREIGN OFFICE: The French Ambassador wises to speak to the First Minister over his remarks on the UNSC CEAN discussions. After spending an inordinate amount of time fumbling with his desk phone, First Minister Cabrera was unable to figure out how to get an outside line. As is usually necessary in these situations, he has his secretary connect the call to the French Ambassador. A transcript of the conversation follows: FRENCH AMBASSADOR: First Minister Cabrera, thank you for taking the time. I am just here to notify you that the French Government will be releasing a statement in response to yours. This is in now way a hostile-message, but to give clarity and what we saw on the events that led to negotiations failing. I was asked to inform your government the UNSC 'demands' were not ultimatums, but were talking points CEAN requested from the UNSC to set an agenda on what we will discuss. MINISTER CABRERA: Mr. Ambassador, we appreciate your clarification on this matter. We were most distressed to find our request for an outline of multi-party talks receive such a response. The fact that this may have been a miscommunication between parties is reassuring. MINISTER CABRERA: However, you must understand that any starting point of a discussion must be on terms that are fair and equitable. Any terms that restrict the ability of our Republic to defend itself and its allies, or to respond to international concerns are not only unpalatable, but not politically feasible given the domestic political concerns of the Republic. MINISTER CABRERA: Additionally, we hope you understand how any restrictions on the use of international spaces in contravention of political norms could be perceived as being made in poor faith. MINISTER CABRERA: We are certainly open to talks with all sovereign nations, both individually and collectively. Especially if such talks alleviate tensions between our allies and those nations. We believe finding a common ground that satisfies the economic and security concerns of all parties is not only possible, but desirable. FRENCH AMBASSADOR: I would agree, but it was hard enough to bring some in the UNSC to agree to talks after Rokkenjima led an anti-communism war that had hurt many in communist China, USSR, and SoE. While it is not the intent of the UNSC to impede the travel or rights of CEAN, their demands were of same quality; denying the UNSC access to The Pacific, territory in the region, and among other matters that the Rokkenjimas presented to us on behest of CEAN. While we understood those were talking-points, would it not be hypocritical of CEAN to say we are acting in mal-faith when we were asked to send talking points which are the bedrock to start a discussion. Would CEAN prefer we lie to them and present them soft and kind statements to get us no where, or would they like to see the harsh demands to begin the discussion and smooth the surface for an end result. FRENCH AMBASSADOR: France is happy to work with your country, but unfortunately we will no longer be willing to negotiate with Rokkenjima and the CEAN members who believe it is their right to trash-talk the UNSC, attack our member states by calling them puppet-masters, and then cry foul to our talking-points to make it seem as if our diplomatic team issued ultimatums to CEAN. France by nature is a peace-loving and diplomatic nation. As a courtesy we wished to inform you because we a see your country among others in CEAN to be respectful and we hope peace-loving nations. MINISTER CABRERA: The Republic is aware of no such demands made on the part of CEAN, by the Nation of Rokkenjima. Nor are we aware of any demands on the part of CEAN being discussed with the Coalition Council. We would be curious as to the content of any such communique provided by Rokkenjima on the part of CEAN. MINISTER CABRERA: Additionally, while the nations of the East Asian Coalition are opposed to colonialism, particularly when that colonialism has the potential destabilize the region. However, we understand the rights of sovereign states to act in accordance with their economic and security interests. The exclusionary zone established in the Coalition Charter is for the purpose of protecting the peoples of East Asia in unclaimed lands from subjugation and protecting the economic well being of the region. MINISTER CABRERA: While the East Asian Economic Zone, as currently constituted, is protected by the East Asian Coalition to prevent political claims. This is meant to deter threats from potentially hostile powers that would seek to interfere with out collective security and economic well-being. MINISTER CABRERA: No portion of the CEAN charter, nor any official policy of the Coalition, forbids travel to these lands or use of the waterways or skies in the East Asian region. Nor does it prevent the deployment forces to the region. However, we trust that all nations would use sound judgment and act in good faith regarding their overseas forces. As requested, the French Ambassador provides transcript of prior discussions with the Nation of Rokkenjima FRENCH AMBASSADOR: As you can tell, this was in the same spirit that CEAN asked us to these ideas. We assumed it would be no problem to send our unrefined agenda topics which Rokkenjima was persistant we provide. FRENCH AMBASSADOR: While we wish to agree with you, the 'offer' submitted by Rokkenjima would not allow us to do some of the things you listed. France has respected the CEAN agreement because if CEAN does not colonize Europe, we have no reason to colonize Asia...However, CEAN no longer offers a diplomatic route so France must be constantly weary of CEAN's intentions. MINISTER CABRERA: While the potential for a formal summit was withdrawn, the doors of the East Asian Coalition remain open to all those who wish discuss matters of common interest. Perhaps, in the near term it would be beneficial for any discussions between our two collectives to first flow through the Foreign Office of Aguacenta, and it's counterpart in the Republic of France. This might serve to mitigate the potential for future misunderstandings and alleviate the political tensions between some of the less agreeable partners on both sides. MINISTER CABRERA: As it is only with continued discourse that peaceful relations between all nations can be maintained. Notes: Reposted with consent. OOC portions of this conversation were omitted. IC conversation remains in its entirety.
    3 points
  42. Heh, that is cute. BK's score graph. I wonder where that leap of score came from, oh, and those extra members.
    3 points
  43. How's that going in that other game for you? >accept whatever is demanded Most people, like myself, are always open to negotiation. Whether people want to negotiate or know how to, that's a different story. Stating "Hey, we can end X for Y." and the reply is "No, frick you, we won't accept that" with no counter offer or willingness to negotiate, that's not a gameplay issue. That's a player issue.
    3 points
  44. ^^ Imagine getting this mad over a video game. Only insults I'm seeing are from your alliance mate, element85. Should probably tell him to calm down some. Too much sodium is bad for one's health.
    3 points
  45. I know its a hard concept to understand, but wars are usually won over total damage done and the ability for one side to keep going and the other side not being able to, or unwilling to. BK is only "beating this shit" out of KT and friends in low and mid tier, and I say that with a grain of salt. KT and friends most important tier, the upper tier, is still untouched. KT and friends "beat the shit" out of every single upper tier and a large part of your mid tier, before you all sunk below 2k score, a range usually occupied by new players and people who are rolled. Also I think BK deserves an award for being most "Retarded and Autistic" as you eloquently say for blitzing KT, then not being able to read and actually click the battle button.
    3 points
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.