[People wanted me to write a thread.]

11 minutes ago, Callisto said:

Decagon, if you and Clock didn't agree with what The Syndicate and BW "did to you" at the time, then why didn't you do something about it? If you felt that you were truly "forced" into this, and you felt as though Syndicate had betrayed you, or some other bullshit, why didn't you punish them. 

Apart from that, as you've just admitted, this was something you wanted to do anyway, and based on the logs WANA has provided, as well as Keegoz's tone in the original logs he provided, where he put up literally no resistance, I don't really see how they forced you onto this. Circling back to those original logs, Keegoz claims that WANA officially made the hit on Rose part of the deal, but WANA, in Keegoz's own logs, quite literally says "If/When Clock hits Rose". That doesn't sound like a precondition to me, if anything, that sounds like, in Syndicate's eyes, you could have either chosen to hit Rose, or not to hit Rose, and Syndicate would have helped with the MysInc/Oasis war either way.

The fact that you did absolutely nothing about this at the time, in my eyes, is a tacit implication that through this entire conversation with WANA, Keegoz got what he ultimately wanted, and didn't feel forced at all. The fact that you are only bringing up all this stuff now I think is really telling

Again, I’ve said it a few times, others have said it as well; there’s no one in Clock that “feels betrayed”, and I’m not sure why literally just discussing events, somehow is interpreted as anything other than a discussion.

Not sure if we’re going to pretend that WANA was somehow mislead by Keegoz, but “if/when”, when there’s another log saying something like “we have to be able to have plausible deniability” sure don’t sound like some self unawareness. But hey, I guess this is literally what “plausible deniability” would look like, right?

We didn’t do anything… because… there was a deal that was brokered? Why is it hard for people to recognize we aren’t complaining lol. You can force someone through many ways besides being direct.

BW getting cold feet, hours before our agreed upon blitz, leaving Clock basically high and dry to deal with MysOasis, and apparently leaking the agreed hit that Clock would make on Rose, which in hindsight meant we’d potentially get blitzed doesn’t sound like some type of forcing to you? Mate, come on. There’s a point where you have to admit that BW’s FA style is always centered around word play and being shady. Being an ally to them now, doesn’t mean you have to pretend the past doesn’t exist.

[People wanted me to write a thread.]

17 hours ago, Callisto said:

If you were truly forced into this whole situation of hitting Rose, that implies to me that you didn't want to do it. If you *really* didn't want to do it, then why didn't you just leak the logs to Rose, hit BW with Rose, leak the logs as CB, and explain your actions to everyone.

The fact that you went through with the plan of hitting Rose implies to me that you were always interested in hitting Rose, whether it was "forced" upon you or not.

If you truly did not appreciate the actions of BW, then why didn't you choose to punish them?

Being forced doesn’t mean it had to be something quite literal. Being forced could be something such as backing out of an agreed plan, hours before, putting pressure on us, for instance.

I don’t think we denied ever wanting to fight Rose, nor did we ever ask for help doing it. “Expanding”, doesn’t read the same as “Help us do the thing we’re planning on doing anyway”.

MysOasis formed, we had plans with BW, and hours before the blitz, someone got cold feet, “forcing” us in a truly typical manner. Who gets cold feet 2-3 hours before a blitz when they agreed to go in with another bloc, and is only okay with it upon the confirmation that Clock will take care of Rose for them? Yeah, it ain’t Clock.

[People wanted me to write a thread.]

Still, no one has given me a logical response to how bringing in more high infra targets, deters low infra nations from chaining. The plausible net damage in that situation, IMO, seems to almost entice pirates, raiders, and chaining.

[People wanted me to write a thread.]

3 hours ago, Angantyr said:

From where I'm sitting, it looks a lot more like everyone who was thinking of using strategies like that are the ones who are complaining, while the alliances who made themselves temporarily impervious to the tactic are cracking jokes at the expense of the others.

 

Have to admit it has been pretty funny to watch

Isn't this... literally Syndi in a nutshell? I hope you aren't *that* oblivious to what the rest of the game thinks of you guys. Inb4 "we don't care what the rest of the game thinks"; that wasn't the point, nor was I asking "if" you care. 

[People wanted me to write a thread.]

1 hour ago, Vemek said:

The date on your logs are 12/12/2021 which lines up with when the war began. Wana's logs mention a swap to full mil which means that conversation came first.

Now, I ask you my initial question again

I won't deny that that's a fair point beyond many others

[People wanted me to write a thread.]

Just now, Prefonteen said:

I mean what was keegoz trying to achieve with that leak? It boils down to you both made a deal and you both !@#$ed eachother over. 

Both, meaning WANA and Keegoz?

[People wanted me to write a thread.]

1 minute ago, Prefonteen said:

I'm confused. Why is clock crying foul over a deal they themselves engineered?

I don’t think we are? If it sounds nonsensical to you, it’s because we aren’t actually “crying foul”

[People wanted me to write a thread.]

8 minutes ago, Vemek said:

Do you dispute the initial logs in which Keegoz's first suggestion is a request that we expand onto Rose with you? 

I see dates and times in my log. Sort of tricky to say which was first, but it’s also hard to get around “what if Clock hits Rose”, “that would alleviate concerns”. 
Maybe I am wrong, it’s legit hard to tell without dates and times

[People wanted me to write a thread.]

6 minutes ago, Vemek said:

Clock: reee minispheres fair wars

Also Clock: >asks BW to dogpile rose alongside them

“We need help” vs “we will hit rose if it helps you”

[People wanted me to write a thread.]

How do you approach someone with a deal, and then “leak” it to the subject party, and frame it as you knowing how Keegoz operates? Wasn’t the plan to hit Rose, suggested, by you, and we only agreed to it?

I might not have the full context, but, you’re saying you came with a deal, and then leaked it because you know how scummy, Keegoz is?

[People wanted me to write a thread.]

1 minute ago, Prefonteen said:

I agree. We shouldnt be defending this action because frankly its the result of your treatment of tS and your creation and enabling of grumpy over the period since npolt.

 

Now pardon me while i farm alongside friend @Sweeeeet Ronny D instead of doing the dirty work of you ungrateful cats.

You sure you read what he actually said?

[People wanted me to write a thread.]

7 minutes ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

It's weird that Clock could have fought one of us with fairly equal footing till about a week ago, and never choose to do that either.  Instead they choose to take an easy fight against BR with a CB that Keegz made some logic jumps and stretched truth to say we told clock. (convenient for him, gets to hit BR, and make us look bad at the same time)

I have said it once, I will say it again, I dont trust any of you clowns, Ro$e or Clock, and this agreement basically covers both of you, and I am not going to apologize for it. 

For the record if people I am not allied to want us to do something, its not because they think it will help us, its because it will help them, and in that case... I am not in the business of helping you beat me.

Knowing HoF was going to leave, and doubting that even if they stayed that we had a chance against HW or r0$e; that's the "equal footing"? Enjoy fighting the same war, over, and over, and over.

[[PEACE] Time is up. (Clock + The Hive/Unforgiven Legion)]

Was an honest pleasure working with The Hive/UL; we're ecstatic that we could come to a quick and painless peace, and I personally hope they do well and have good fortune

[[PEACE] Time is up. (Clock + The Hive/Unforgiven Legion)]

For times sake, I'm going to keep this short and sweet.

The Clock bloc has agreed to White Peace with the former members of The Andromeda bloc. Both parties recognize the good fight, and have acknowledged a more mutually beneficial path, going forward.

"TERMS"
1. No new wars will be permitted to be declared between the parties mentioned above after 5-27-2022's DC.
2. Any currently ongoing wars will be permitted to end in whatever fashion the attacker/defender wish to pursue.

This White Peace has been discussed, acknowledged, and agreed upon by the following bodies and their respective members:







(*Art courtesy of Minesome)
Clock, on behalf of Test, and all Protectorates, and all Extensions and those associated,
CATA
Co-Leader: HisHolyDecagon
Co-Leader: TigerFire
2iC/Foreign Affairs: Keegoz
Foreign Affairs: Cadn

Eclipse
Co-Leader: Pascal
Co-Leader: Vein

Aurora
First Explorer: Kan0601
First Explorer: ToxicPepper
Second Explorer: Alex
Chairman of FA: Xi Jinping
Chairman of MA: Jacob Knox

Weeb
General Secretary: Empiur
2iC/Head of FA: Anri







On behalf of The Hive,
Conscience - MinesomeMC
Conscience - Alexio
Conscience - Caboose
Neuron of Fear - Church 





On behalf of Unforgiven Legion,
Revan - Unforgiven Emperor
Drekkza - Unforgiven Emperor
Rexar - Unforgiven Emperor

[Down-declares are unreasonable at the moment, so I did the math.]

5 hours ago, playerwhoplays said:

So. If the March balance change to war score is any indicator, I'm definitely in the minority of this...but I wholeheartedly believe that the current system for war is absolutely ridiculous. The very brief case synopsis? A player with 25 cities can declare on a player with 10 cities, with a little creative accounting. I'm obviously not going to leave it at that claim without proof, but that's what the rest of the post is for, isn't it? I spent a few hours running the numbers and theory-crafting the most ridiculous scenario I could possibly think of, so join me for the ride: this is the math that allows someone with 25 cities to be attacked by someone with 70. No jokes, no lies. It's possible, and I'll show you why.

 

First and foremost, what the hell am I talking about? "Down-declares are an essential part of warfare! If we can't down declare how will we ever fight a winning war?" Well, my wonderful colleague, you're right. Being able to declare on a range of targets is extremely important. If you couldn't declare on people just 3 cities below you, it would be extremely hard to find targets for raids or wars. Don't worry, I'm not saying down-declaring should be entirely removed. However, in the current state of the game, it does desperately need to he toned down. Let's start with our first situation.

 

You are a nation with 10 cities, 2,000 infra in each, 4 projects, max military improvements. Your rather small alliance is at war with another rather small alliance, no global-scale conflict. You are able to fight your enemies well enough that you have max military right now, although you have no missiles of either type. In this situation, you have 2012.5 Nation Score. The equation for this nation score is as follows...

9×75+((2000×10)÷40)+(4×20)+((5×10×3000)×0.0004 )+((5×10×250)×0.025)+((5×10×15)×0.3)+(3×10×5)+10=2012.5

Simplified, that's 675 city score, 500 infrastructure score, 80 project score, 747.5 military score, and the base score of 10.

 

Your opponent hires a mercenary who is playing as a dedicated down-declaring nation. This mercenary has 25 cities; how on earth does someone at 25 cities attack someone with just 10? Simple. Minimizing their cities. When I say minimize, I mean the absolute bare minimum: all military improvements except dockyards, and a reactor. This requires just 800 infrastructure. Additionally, they have zero military at the time of declaration, and they do have five projects, but no nukes or missiles. This nation has a score of 2,410. Again, the equation follows.

24×75+((800×25)÷40)+(5×20)+10

This equates to 1800 city score, 500 infrastructure score, 100 project score, no military score, and the base score of 10. This nation is EASILY within range to declare on your maxed out nation.

 

So why is this a problem? "He's declaring with no military, I'll just roll him and get superiority quickly!" You should know it's never that simple. After all, they just have to perform the single oldest trick in the nation sim player's arsenal: double buy military at turn change and, in this case, laugh as your opponent is literally unable to fight back. The nation with 10 cities has a max soldier count of 10×5×3000, which equals 150,000. The nation with 25 cities can buy 25x5×1000 soldiers per day, or 125,000. With a double buy that's an instant 250,000 soldiers. There is absolutely nothing that 10 city nation can do in this situation.

 

So, what's the point to be made here? Well, simple...this gets exponentially worse as your score and city count rises. This is where my claim of a c70 fighting a c25 comes from. It sounds absurd (and is an unrealistic achievement) but is entirely possible, just following the math.

Same parameters and calculations as last time, the c25 is maxed out and the c70 is minimizing hard.

c25 nation strength: 24×75+((2000×25)÷40)+(10×20)+((5×25×3000)×0.0004 )+((5×25×250)×0.025)+((5×25×15)×0.3)+(3×25×5)+10

5128.75 NS.

1800 city score, 1250 infra score, 200 project score, 1868.75 military score, 10 base score.

c70 nation strength: 69×75+((70×800)÷40)+(11×20)+10

6805 NS.

5175 city score, 1400 infra score, 220 project score, no military score, 10 base score.

The minimum NS a 6805 score nation can declare on is 5103.75. Hell, the 70c could pack on around 100 planes and still be able to make that hit, giving them even more of an edge when they double buy 2100 more to fight the 25c's 1875.

Obviously, that scenario is ridiculous. Nobody has 70 cities, and it would likely be a waste to get there, especially with no economic improvements. But you know what's a little less ridiculous? 50 cities with a more balanced setup. There are already nations at and above this number, so it's no stretch to say that this is possible right now. Might take a lot of elbow grease, but it's both possible and feasible. Which leads into another question...

 

Why isn't this a more common practice? "If it were really so effective why don't we see every single alliance with a ton of nations like this?" Well... there's a really, REALLY heavy downside to putting all your stats into combat: you have no cash flow to speak of. A nation in this vein requires support from other nations just to keep from going bankrupt, starving, or losing power. Not to mention, it's kind of lame to solely exist for combat if you think about it. Makes you a burden to others at all times unless you're fighting a war. And as such, it's a program that has to be run at a loss, and the person doing it needs to be skilled (and might be better for a different role anyway). But this is still something that can be completely abused. And it needs to be addressed before it suddenly becomes a major issue.

So what can we do about it? Well, I don't think a hard cap on down declares is a good idea. Too many ways that can be abused. However, I do believe the way score is calculated needs to be changed. I do ask that you take this suggestion with the notion that I'm not some top tier veteran god of war, but just someone who has seen the same issue plaguing the lower echelon for years.

My suggestion is to lessen the weight your military has within your score, and increase the weight of cities significantly to compensate. I'm really not sure what the right answer to "by how much?" is personally, but hopefully I can trust some of the fine folks here in the forums to get some math thrown around and come up with a few ideas. This could solve the problem with absolutely ludicrous down-declares of a 15+ city difference while still allowing alliances to defend themselves too.

Equally importantly, there needs to be a tighter up-declare cap as well to prevent this system from being abused to all high hell. It doesn't have to be much, just enough to make sure that if you're fighting someone, their allies with another city or two can still counter and punish. Concerns about a bunch of c15s hitting a single c30 and the other c30s being unable to lift a finger are entirely valid if the c15s are skilled.

 

Anyway, that's the post. Thanks for taking the time to read through. This took me a couple hours (on and off) to write up and double check my math with, but hopefully it was worth it.

Here's hoping I can start a discussion on a healthier war to wage war.

Glad to see people break things down to the mathematical level. I’ve been personally trying to wrap my head around “how” to fix, or address this problem, and the only thing that even resembled some sense of logic, was by also lowering the score impact of military units.

If you need another example, Cataclysm has a c16, right now, who is fighting a c33. Not as extreme as your example, admittedly, but not that far off.

You also nailed the area regarding “how do we fight a winning war”, which I don’t think many people consider at all. As the opponent is getting lower and lower infra, and military units, they just begin to slowly drop out of range, but on their way down, they’ll ironically face the same situation you laid out here; being able to do more and more outlandish, and extreme downdeclares.

[(This thread is scary to Hollywood and Celestial)]

It's beautiful; not just the clock, but, the overall concept of it. Time, slowly ticking away, second by second, day by day. It's unrelenting, unending, and has no thought, opinion, or bias. It ticks away, all the same. This clock in particular is a work of art. It defies common convention, and makes the viewer wonder, "where will I be, when the clock keeps ticking". Truthfully though, there is no answer, for we are all unimportant, and as our lives pass us by, the clock, well... the clock will always, keep ticking.

[Peace in our Time]

2 minutes ago, Hodor said:

 

 

I'm doing a lot of work trying to help y'all understand something that is super detrimental to me.

You don’t have to speak slowly; it’s more of it just being wildly unrealistic, so I don’t usually tease the impractical ideas that are used as justification or a “way to solve it” for others.

[Peace in our Time]

3 minutes ago, Hodor said:

Well, kicking the shit out of Mystery and Oasis seemed to do the trick.

And, with the two parties involved being the only parties who could plausibly “kick the shit out of” each other, I’m grasping at a good narrative here, please help

[Peace in our Time]

16 minutes ago, Etat said:

I'm not involved in any back channel secret FA chit chat my friend, but I don't think I'm completely deaf either.  I'm gonna take a stab in the dark though and suggest you lot misinterpreted comments made somewhere in jest, or are just plain making stuff up. 

Also there is an apparent lack of trust consequent to your last chaining war which now I guess means you just have to lie in the bed you've made for yourselves.  I'm not however reading any sort of profound rejection of the practice from the player-base in general.  Personally I think it's in the same realm as dog-piling, a valid, if somewhat inglorious strategy that shouldn't be misused.

Additionally, I think it quite an imaginative leap to say we 'signed' Ro$e, when in fact it is a clearly time limited clause within a demilitarization agreement and otherwise very different from any sort of treaty.  Continually calling it a treaty or anything like it doesn't make it so.

As an aside, I'm always here for cuddles if you need one

We’re responding to what was said, by HW gov itself. I’ll take a stab in the dark and assume you didn’t listen to Thalmors show, and I’d recommend or encourage you and others listen to it? Hard to make things up on our end, when it’s the other side saying things.

I still think there’s some misinterpretation, lol. We’re not sitting here with a “Ah shucks, we’re the chainers now!”. There’s nothing but glee, and excitement on Clock’s side.

A treaty is an agreement between two parties. All treaties ingame are “time limited”, and inb4 someone says “they don’t activate unless someone hits them”, yes, congratulations for understanding how all treaties work. Call it a deal, an accepted offer, an arrangement, and then look up synonyms for the word Treaty.

I also wonder why either party to this treaty actually even cares if the other is hit, really weird to think about that

[Peace in our Time]

1 hour ago, Etat said:

I can confirm that before this temporary agreement we members of HW were not exactly quivering in our boots at the thought of being attacked by either (or both) Clock and BR.  If you think we in HW are pixel huggers you are a noob or an idiot.
 

Having yet to receive an invitation to the decision making channels of our sphere, I can only surmise that we (and presumably Celestial) would rather pursue our own goals on our own terms without being drawn into Clock and BR’s little drama.  It is funny to me how such a time limited and trivial clause (trivial if everyone is being honest that is) has caused such a fuss.
 

We all know there is little love lost between our spheres, but it seems we are of similar minds when people try to call the shots for us.  People sure seem to moan about how bad or boring politics is when it doesn’t go their way.

Apparently quivering enough to sign with the only obvious opponent. It’s not about “us” getting our way; it’s about HW being quite vocal about wanting or enticing Clock to hit them, and when people start militarizing, there’s a cuddle group formed in the fake veil of safety, and it’s perpetuated as an anti-chaining resolve.

Pointing out what people perceive, is not moaning and groaning, by the way. If that’s the case, then you guys are all doing the same via treaty.

Saying “Well if you aren’t going to hit HW or ro$e, it doesn’t matter”, is a fallacy statement and everyone knows it. I can flip it by saying “You’re not worried about Clock’s quote-unquote little drama, so why sign with ro$e?”. It’s a double standard, and a fake attempt to appear right or to be justified.

[Peace in our Time]

Still not sure how *more* high infra targets, deters low infra chaining.

 

This treaty doesn’t force anyone to not chain, or to play by HW or ro$e’s rules. This is like fully slotting a low infra pirate and thinking you “win” because of a victory screen at the end. Sort of makes sense given that I’m under the impression that TKR practices that exact same thing.
 

I truly think if chaining is a concern, that adding more people with high infra to lose is the exact opposite of a deterrent lol. I don’t know which genius thought this up, but next time, please think about the math beforehand

[Peace in our Time]

"We brought in more high infra nations to deter the low infra alliances"

[End to Clock/Backroom War]

Is this a "We formed this alliance and don't have much, and the market prices are increasing" kind of thing, or, am I not recognizing a troll post?

[Very Good Media]

I’ve never quite seen such an impressive array of staff 

[Politics and Whales]

1 hour ago, Vice said:

I see more crying about whales, I downvote. Part of the game I enjoyed was aspiring to be a larger nation. Maybe grow internally?

Hey, you're active again? You realize... Keegoz is a c38, right? He's literally 8 cities higher than you, advocating for something so someone larger than him, can't downdeclare on you.