Jump to content

Cherise

Members
  • Posts

    120
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Cherise

  1. Which is strange, since while Rose took around 60% of their incomes in damages between this war and GnR (i.e, damage level comparable to Grumpy), Syndicate took like 10-20% of their incomes in damages this war.
  2. Congrats and good luck. All hail the new Vexz puppet!
  3. Minispheres -> Tripolarity -> Bipolarity -> Hegemony -> Minispheres / Anarchy Tripolarity -> three major blocs (which is true to an extent), a bunch of neutrals / hangers on (which is true to an extent), and the major blocs keep rolling each other in 2v1 dogpiles. Eventually, one of the blocs dies (Hollywood took a hell of a lot of damage in the last 3 wars, Rose took a lot of damage between GnR and 522), both sides proceed to loot the dead bloc for members and alliances, and we have a bipolar system. Between Rose coalition's failure to defeat Hollywood, and the recent dogpile vs Hollywood, Minispheres are as good as dead. What we have now is a state of tripolarity given the big three (Syndicate, Rose, Hollywood). I don't think, given the political configuration, that there is much chance of reverting from a tripolar system into a minispheres system. At best, a major sphere could collapse and be replaced by another, but that's just tripolarity extending itself. And in fact, that's the best possible outcome right now, with the perpetuation of tripolarity as opposed to decay into a bipolar system, which often is a crypto-hegemony (i.e, one side always wins all its wars) that might not include you.
  4. Your coalition has dealt overwhelming damage to Hollywood, considering the combination of TLR, GnR, and 522. I cannot seriously believe that you are planning to reroll them; doing so would be tantamount to alliance-killing. Since I tend to play by my own metrics instead of standard metrics: TKR has taken, with Net Negative Profit in parentheses: Hollywood vs Bollywood: 173.07 (165.45) Billion Guns and Roses: 125.29 (102.54) Billion The Last Ride: 31.05 (21.92) Billion. Total: 329.41 (289.91) Billion Grumpy Old Bastards: Hollywood vs Bollywood: 99.26 (96.93) Billion Guns and Roses: 50.88 (29.68) Billion Total: 150.14 (126.61) Billion The Duck Hunt NAP expired in April, if I recall correctly. We are about 5 months distant from that. Grumpy makes around 1.6 billion a day in peacetime, or if we consider 135 days (5 months minus time without infra), 216 billion. The Knights Radiant made about 2.1 billion a day. Over 120 days (another 15 days taken off since Rose coalition was able to deal actual damage to TKR), that would have been about 252 billion. For the last 5 months, TKR lost everything they made to wartime. Grumpy Old Bastards lost 60% of their income.
  5. I don't think BlackRose actually needs a NAP at this point. See, TKR took about 55 million damage per remaining city. Grumpy Old Bastards took 80 million damage per remaining city. If you consider the damages TKR took in a combination of TLR and GnR, TKR took 100 million damage per city in the last three wars. That's equivalent to 200 days build-up in the lower mid-tier. Hollywood is incapable of serious offensive action in the next 3 months with or without a NAP. === What the NAP does, on the other hand, is forestall a few things: -First, it dampens Rose or Syndicate's desire to try to flip Hollywood, should BlackRose obviously break apart. Demonstrably having flipped Hollywood is dangerous because it indicates hostile intent vs the other, and Hollywood is of no consequence in a Syndicate vs Rose war that launches before the NAP expires. -Second, it prevents Rose / Syndicate (most likely against just Rose) from intervening against Hollywood should Hollywood elect to hit Oasis or Minc. While Hollywood IS still cash bound after the 100 million damage taken, Oasis and Minc have demonstrated their inability to contribute much against Hollywood, and tier-wars that are conducted as downdeclares can be cheap or even profitable. -Third, it prevents Hollywood from intervening against Rose / Syndicate should either or both elect to hit Oasis / Minc. This is only of note should Oasis / Minc actually choose to take offensive action (hitting one side of Rosynd, then having Hollywood provide cover against the other). Since Oasis / Minc sat out the war (and probably profited around 183 billion by doing so), there is a valid CB against their wardodging. Then again, there's a valid CB against Blackwater for war dodging last war cycle (4-7 million damage per city taken in TLR, formal war dodging in GnR), and no one's hitting them over that.
  6. Thanks for the clarification.
  7. I'd see the NAP having two aspects. First, TKR took massive damage between the TLR-GnR cluster and the Blackrose war. Moreover, Hollywood lost its rebuliding money as it was hit only one month after the GnR. TKR likely wants the NAP at least in order to be able to recover economically. Second, historically, NAPs have been used by weaker powers to break up the coalition that destroyed them. The IQ-Syndi NAPs in the run-up to Knightfall effectively precipitated Knightfall; i.e, TKR ran out of targets and started hitting random people. The Duck Hunt NAP resulted in Swamp being destroyed on its own and eventually saw Hedgemoney's defection into Hollywood, setting up the stage for GnR. The absence of a NAP in the GnR war, in contrast, resulted in Blackrose and Hollywood blowing each other's faces up almost immediately after the war ended. === The NAP should be seen less in terms of "morality" (bad for the game, etc etc etc), but in terms of its existence as a political play.
  8. So... betting pool on how long it takes for Rose / Syndicate to hit Oasis / Mystery, especially with the NAP manifested.
  9. Five times so far, Babai. "Final Alan *" should be a meme. It's a bunch of shitty Squaresoft RPGs that have roughly the same plot and watch the same shit burning. That said, in my view, Final Fantasy 6 was the best of the Squaresoft RPGs, imo. FF7 etc took it in a different direction, FFX was too linear. FF13, I really liked the character designs, but the plot, linearity, and characterization was disappointing.
  10. Protip: Cthulu, he doesn't care. See, for Greene, you're a small micro that's doing raiding operations, into what's effectively his farm. He's betting that you'll eventually give up, and what's more, no matter how much damage you deal, he doesn't really care that much because he doesn't care about his members, and even if he did, he's likely rich off something or another (the Taith scam, for instance), and can bribe them into staying. You really have a few options here: 1. Resort to alliance killing tactics. Find someone who's interested in poaching his members, then beat his members up and have your friend try to poach them. Unfortunately, 770 has low-quality members that aren't really useful for anything other than being farms (i.e, a liability when you get rolled). 2. Find some friends to beat him up for you. You can resort to tactical strikes; i.e, raids of senior government members and Greene himself, (Rose seems to be doing this already), as well as a general alliance rolling, which would probably need Delta or ex-Delta assets given the relatively low tier. 3. Scale up and do it yourselves. The primary threat would be Black Skies, which is actually (relatively) substantial, and would require quite a few nations to take down, or just adroit diplomacy to get them to avoid defending Greene. 770 on its own should be engageable by about 22 C12s downdeclaring, with some other nations to deal with Greene's higher-tier assets, which can probably be done by calling in favors from others. You currently have 8 nations at a C5 tiering.
  11. C40 vs C35 is not a one-sided battle. It's an extremely workable updeclare, comparable to C6 vs C7. I would actually consider it a sidedec, not an actual updeclare. For your range, it would be as if you had declared on a C28. The point is that while the number of kills for a single city remains constant, the agglomeration of cities controls damage stability. Let's say, for instance, 100 ships fight 50 ships. Ship fights, like ground fights, are symmetrical in the amount of damage dealt, but unlike ground fights, ship fights ignore population-based resistance, so it's an easier example. Ships deal between 8-12% of their count in damage, so let's say the 100 ships kill 10 ships, while the 50 ships kill 5 ships. So far, so good, right? But now it's 95 ships vs 40 ships, or 95% of previous damage output vs 80% of previous damage output. In a return fight, the formerly 100 ships have a strong chance to kill another 10 ships (50/50), while the 40 ships can expect to kill 4 ships instead of 5, a 20% reduction. Let us say, assume 12 MAP go in. 100 ships kill 10 ships on the first stab, 9 ships on the second stab, and 9 ships on the third stab. That's 28 ships killed. The 50 ships on the other hand, kill 5 ships on the first stab, 4 ships on the second stab, and 3 ships on the third stab. That's a total of 12 ships killed, vs 28 ships killed, or about 85% of what having 50% the number of ships should actually imply (12 vs 14). At the end of the exchange, the 100 ships guy has 88 ships left. The 50 ships guy has 22 ships left, or that the 50 ships guy has lost more than 50% of his ships, whereas the 100 ships guy has 88% of his ships. If we continue infinitely, ignoring rebuys, the 50 ships guy, in another 2 engagements, will have about 5 ships left, while the 100 ships guy will have 85% ships left. Another attack by the 100 ships guy finishes off the 50 ships guy, or in other words, the 50 ships only manage to kill 15 ships, while the 100 ships have killed 50 ships. That's very disproportionate to what a 2:1 ratio looks like on paper. This is why Lancaster's Square Law applies to PnW (even if we go to a salvo damage model, as a TKR player who really should have known better tried to obsfucate with). The 100 ships are not twice as powerful as the 50 ships, but four times more powerful than the 50 ships due to their greater damage stability. === As far as the game being too incompetent these days, I actually agree. The near-abolition of plane strat has dumbed down the fight. I still recall when, during Nova Riata vs Pantheon, I deployed a bunch of Pantheon members using Soldiers-Planes vs max-milled Nova Riata. We eventually overextended, after which Classic BK saved our asses once NR had been exposed with the infinite resources exploit, but NR's fighters were getting decimated, deplaned, and rendered non-operational despite fighting a nominally weaker force that had half their members. This actually formed a sort of trinity, because tanks were useful for certain applications, planes were useful for certain applications, and ships were useful for yet another set of applications. Tanks were used primarily as raiding tools and also to bulk score, in order to present a unified line and to prevent easy updeclares. The relative disutility of tanks in a conventional fight, likewise, provided an interesting meta in which tanks countered soldiers, planes countered tanks, and soldiers countered planes. Plane stratters were vulnerable to people conducting raiding ops against them (as they still are, except plane strat does very little these days), and presented exactly what you were asking for, a way to counter dogpiles. Now, if people went to max tanks to counter raiding ops against planestratters, as people are doing now, they bulked up score massively and made themselves vulnerable to downdeclares or planestrats. These days, everyone maxes tanks, but there's really no penalty because plane strat doesn't work anymore. === But, honestly, I think you're just enjoying the extent to which downdeclaring is broken right now, and you want to have the game changed so that whoever the upper tier controls the game. Or, in other words, we should just make it so that Wampus owns the game, or alternately everyone builds a Wampus and goes to straight PnW feudalism (tons of farms and a fighting caste). Numerical advantage is a fundamental aspect of the game; hell, you arguably won Roqpocalypse because of your numerical advantage (Alex listened to the masses). You are asking Alex right now to privilege the few (with way too many cities) over the many, and depending on how well the few donate / pay up, it might end up being the case. Since NPO has departed, I don't have any particular affixation against a game made up of Wampuses and farms. In fact, I'd think it'd be exciting to an extent because of the sheer douchebaggery we could expect (Schrute, Greene, etc) from these people who have been built up with the cash of the masses and the ideological bullshit we could expect from people who can abuse their "lessers" with pure downdeclares. I'm retired, the game, imo, is built around douchebaggery, and it wouldn't bother me.
  12. Should I find him for you Redarmy? I'm somewhat ill-disposed right now, and I'd like someone to entertain you for me.
  13. The biggest complaint I have about this war (and admit it, it's more reasonable than Hollywood's whining), is that Orbis no longer has a common enemy to fight after Grumpy's been sufficiently taken down. The unifying factor of everyone feeling threatened by Grumpy and Hollywood going out of its way to make itself unlikable is something we haven't had since NPO-IQ-OD. When Grumpy is sufficiently neutered, new targets will emerge and the regularly scheduled politics will emerge again.
  14. Upvoted so I can get downvoted. The point of IC / OOC is just so we can say, despite being a [email protected]#$ / Backstabbing !@#$ / Manipulative Bastard / Sadist in-game, I'm a perfectly nice guy/girl IRL. What you do anywhere reflects who you are. You might say it's just a contextual element of your personality, but it's still a part of your personality as a whole. To put it another way, if you go through Gary Brecher / John Nolan's the War Nerd, the Japanese are stereotyped as being completely savage in wartime, but overly polite in peacetime. The peacetime politeness does not mean that WW2 atrocities didn't happen, or that if you put them (at least the WW2 Japanese) in the same circumstances again, the same thing wouldn't happen. === As for the OP's sympathies, as I've pointed out, playing PnW is potentially a doxxing vulnerability 5-10 years on. The community has actively supported / tolerated Nazis, and if your comments regarding KT etc are dug out by a journalist (or a background checker), you may suffer IRL for that. Put another way, consider a MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online [b]Role Playing Game[/b]). There, the IC/OOC divide can be considered substantially stronger, because it's explicitly a "Role Playing Game". Even then, a reasonably-run MMORPG will ban or censor you for having accounts labeled "Hitler Did Nothing Wrong" or obvious [email protected]#$ roleplays, because the corporate entity will be stigmatized for tolerating such things.
  15. Also, oh nice, Skae is back. (Arrgh applicant, but not on Arrgh Discord).
  16. I suppose it's stupid for assuming good will on your side, as opposed to assuming you weren't fundamentally genocidal. The other side's perspective was that they could not end the war because while your side was being effectively suppressed for the time being (Fark / TCW / Pantheon entering / switching sides did improve the pressure), it could not present itself a security guarantee for the post-war. Providing a massive reparation payment (Black Knights was attacked, after all) that would have shifted the strategic balance sufficiently (i.e, allowed NPO / BK / GoG to buy enough cities to have parity the war after that) would have been an alternative way of ending the war than the long-war IQ felt it needed or the eventual administrative action that ended the war. Remember, I did bother to criticize NPO etc for not selecting a reps policy to achieve the objective. Even if not all of the reps were going to be paid, substantial reps from individual players and alliances could have reduced the duration of the conflict. === As an aside, something like 800 billion represented the total amount of money supply in the game close to the termination of the war. If we consider a paired RSS quantity, that'd imply there were 1.6 trillion of liquid value. I no longer remember the exact calculations, but it was estimated that there was around 1-4 trillion in illiquid assets at the end of the war. I seem to recall 2 trillion being the estimate, with 4 trillion being an upper value. 600 billion transferred from one side to the other (i.e, crippling one side's rebuild, providing city growth to the other) would have been a sufficient basis to end the war without needing it to stretch on as long as it did.
  17. You really should have just bribed NPO to go away last war. Likewise, NPO was dumb for not trying to extract massive reps. We really didn't need to go through the 8-9 months of that. Then again, having you guys dump 300-600 billion on NPO to get them to let you rebuild probably would have seen the same "MOLON LABE" crap we saw in the actual war.
  18. It's that casualties are based on how many planes the opponent has that creates the percentages. For instance, a C10 hitting a C100, first, a team of 3 C10s will not be able to damage the C100 beyond the rebuy capability of the C100, and hence no actual damage will be dealt beyond war stats. Second, the C10s will see degradation of their combat capability as a function of the relative ratio between C100 and C10; vs a C20, on the other hand, the C10 will lose its planes much slower than suiciding into the C100s (and that's not even a tactical suicide, that's just pure suicide). As for percentages in general; it's more a way of thinking. You're trying to fathom a gameplay features difference, as opposed to qualitative difference, between C6s engaging C7s and C35s engaging C40s. On the qualitative level, it's definitely there, the C35s (usually) will be more experienced and know what they're doing, whereas the C7s will need to be babysat. There is also a subtle, but not really substantial difference, between C6s vs C7s and C35s vs C40s. The C40s in the latter case, especially at the start of the war, will have massive amounts of infra, meaning that partisan resistance as part of ground attacks is higher, but the partisan resistance aspect of ground attacks is really minimal and can be easily bypassed. Or, in other words, beyond the qualitative and mild gameplay factors, there's no real difference between a C6 hitting a C7 and a C35 hitting a C40. That's why I'm saying ratios and percentages.
  19. Oblivion has no low-tiers, mind you. They're an almost completely solid C28 block. Also, as an aside, since Micchan thinks that it's better to lose than to win, does everyone now have a dogpile CB vs TKR now? Every war, we dogpile CB because TKR is so lovable and we want to make them happy by dogpiling them. Can you guys please stop? I resent the probable formation of a hegemony within 1-2 years, but you guys are just embarrassing. Can you please call in your PR agents from Knightfall? Those were good. This is terrible.
  20. Is TKR really trying to convince people that being dogpiled by TKR is fun? That's some new levels of spin here. I approve.
  21. Chaos vs KETOG was semi-fair / even until Nova Riata in the TKR order of battle imploded after Pooball was exposed for having generated massive resources with a timing glitch. Then Chaos started falling apart, it seems. The war also resembled GnR to an extent because of the downdec work conducted by KETOG, as well as Chaos' inability to effectively updeclare against KETOG.
  22. Stop with the mendacity. Oblivion was being supported by Hollywood assets and WTF was generally hitting Hollywood, at least in the early stages. In actuality, WTF was likely being used to skirmish Oblivion pre-war (that it was untreatied and KT was ignoring it suggests it was bait for Oblivion), except that WTF was complete crap and dealing trickles of damage to Hollywood. The only thing in my mind that "resembles" a true war, fought for the sake of a war, with terrible odds might be: -KT vs Oasis. True, Oasis triggered the conflict itself, but KT wasn't backing down and would have turned Oasis into raider bait if Oasis hadn't done something about it. KT faced a force 4-5 times its size in terms of tiering-adjusted strength and managed to achieve positive war stats in the process. -NPO vs Chaos / KETOG. If you trust what Sphinx said in RON, if Guardian and Grumpy had sold infra and downdeclared into NPO, instead of functioning as logistics, the war outcome would have been substantially different. NPO, likewise, knew that it had bad odds on paper but went in anyways. We ended up with a war stretching more than 6 months as a consequence. The recent Guns and Roses might count, except that Oasis and Minc elements went in completely expecting that they had adequate forces. They likely did, but major [email protected]#$-ups (the beige order, for one) resulted in an operational defeat.
  23. I'm wondering how much of Cam knew this was going to happen (not Nexus specifically, but someone) and how many members were just blowing Epi. Anyways, can Cam get better war stats than TKR? The techniques have all been discussed. Whether Cam has the ability to implement is another question. I wouldn't be surprised if this ended with Camelot disbanding and the remainder of the bank being funneled into some Swiss bank account.
  24. You know, let me put out my view on this general war. Hollywood deserved this rolling because of its really bad assault on Rose last war, wherein it obtained a tiering superiority and bulldozed both Rose and the people who came in to reverse the dogpile. Moreover, the winner of the last war was going to be the loser of the next war; i.e, if Rose had won the last war, it'd have likely been hit by Blackwater mid-war or by a combination of Blackwater and Hollywood the subsequent war. This would have been a result of a perceived Rose hegemony due to the specific outcome (i.e, the interventions were secret treaties and so on). The only way Rose could have won the previous war would have been to produce a decisive victory, and as a consequence of The Last Ride, Swamp was too shattered to provide the additional mass to overrun Hollywood. But, on the flip side, Hollywood winning despite a mild numerical inferiority WAS a major problem for Hollywood as well. The amount of force Hollywood faced implied that #1, that Hollywood had upper tier supremacy, and #2, that the game mechanics changes since Roqpocalypse meant that upper tier supremacy was potentially gamebreaking. The game in general felt that Hollywood had demonstrated that it was a tremendous threat; i.e, it had lost Guns and Roses by losing. Hollywood, in other words, had options available (just as Rose coalition had options available), and its choice of winning the previous war (and I still suspect Rose etc sabotaged their last war) resulted in its current and devastating loss. ==== As for more general remarks, the repeated rollings of Paragon, Paracovenant, then NPO and IQ obscured key facts about this game, simply because for you guys, Paragon, Paracovenant, and NPO were non-entities and non-people. War is not fun. No one is going to deliberately start a war they won't win (barring suspected "rigged" wars like Surf's Up). Unless [email protected]#$-ups occur, wars WILL be dogpiles, because the defender won't really have much chance of successfully repelling the assault. The losers will lose their infra, some alliances on the losing side will collapse (see what's happening with Chocolate Castle right now), and even if the losers have the logistics for the infra-destruction to be a blip, they will not be able to play the game for the weeks to months the war will last. Or, in other words, as people have remarked regarding other games, "wars are against the rules of the game, just not enforced as such, because they're rarely fun for the losing side, and are effectively a way of driving them out of the game." If, say, we increase the counter-dogpile mechanics in the war, first, we increase the strength of harassment attacks (probable WTF, probable KT), which could ruin the game meta on its own (i.e, optimal warfighting protocol is now to send harassment units out), and second, we make the dogpiles even worse. As I've said before, no one will launch a war they do not expect to win; Hollywood did not launch vs Rose thinking that they had a substantial chance of losing, Rosynd did not attack Hollywood thinking that they didn't have the forces available to conduct resistance, and so on. ==== Then, you might ask, what are wars fundamentally about? They're about power. They're about achieving a strategic configuration for the post-war that's favorable to the initiating side, so much that they might be sufficient to eventually achieve a hegemony. While I've shown I've disagreed with your whinefest about how "unfair" this war is (to reiterate: all wars are unfair), I do agree that we are fast approaching a bipolar situation. Or, in other words, the minispheres concept was NEVER going to be stable; it was a facade (and the facade in itself could have been useful) and was eventually going to break down. And it's still your goddamn fault for the breakdown; if you had never attacked Rose the way you did, interventionist forces would never have had to intervene and demonstrate their own incompetence. Regarding this state of affairs, I am somewhat disappointed that minisphere system fell apart so soon, first, and that it is likely going to devolve into a bipolar arrangement as opposed to a tripolar arrangement (a tripolar system will degenerate into a bipolar arrangement eventually). But it was TKR-sphere, Hedgemoney, and collectively Hollywood's call that caused all of this.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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