Kebab

As much as I respect you, I'm going to have to tell you to check your math. Reason? You can't have more than 100% chance of anything happening. I don't know what formula you used (By the looks of it, you just simply multiplied the percentage per turn by the number of turns in that length of time), but it's definitely not right. Since you're finding the chance that at least one nuclear meltdown occurs, you could calculate that by subtracting the probability that no meltdown occurs from 100%. How do you calculate the chance that no meltdown occurs over a year? Let's instead simplify it and ask how we calculate the chance that no meltdown occurs over three turns. Given that with 60 NPP, the chance of no meltdown occuring per turn is 99.976%, then the chance of no meltdown occuring over three turns would be 99.928%, or a 0.072% chance of a meltdown occuring over three turns, because .99928 = .99976*.99976*.99976 . Using that idea and given that a year is 4380 turns, and we have 60 NPP, the chance of no meltdown occuring is (.99976)^4380 = 34.952%, or a 65.048% of a meltdown occuring. That's still not good odds, but a long way from a beyond certain chance. That was nerdy, but those misleading numbers are causing hysteria, especially since a nuclear meltdown is planned to remove cities entirely.

So nowadays, the only strat that most alliances come up with when they fight wars involve pummeling air. It can be awesome when you're winning, but it isn't as fun if you end up on the receiving end of a blitz. Yes, there's the possibility of getting ground control, but really doesn't do much if you already lost a majority of planes. You'd still be stuck demilitarizing or doing "hit and decomm" if you didn't want to get your tanks airstriked by enemy planes. If spamming planes is the only good strategy in alliance wars, then politics and war wouldn't be much of a strategy game. To counter this, I propose that we replace the current ground control mechanic with a level system. This level system is somewhat like how you used to have to get 6 ground control victories to beige, but instead of the levels being progress toward victory, the levels would represent how much airfields have been captured. I propose six levels with each level corresponding to the percentage of the "airfields" of your opponent that you control (i.e if you are at level 2 control, this would mean you control 33% of your opponent's airfields, which means your opponent can only use 67% of their airforce). The levels of ground control would be 17%, 33%, 50%, 67%, 83%, and 100%. At the last level of ground control, your opponent can't use airforces against you at all. This would also mean that if your opponent has air superiority, then they lose it. Each immense triumph ground victory would result in an increase in one level of ground control, and if your opponent gets a pyrrhic victory, a moderate success, or an immense triumph while they are under ground control, then you lose one, two, and three levels of ground control respectively. If someone else gets an immense triumph over you, then you would also lose a level of ground control over all your other opponents. Those are the basic mechanics. I also propose additional mechanics that may or may not come with this proposed change: 1. Modify the blitzkrieg policy so that instead of allowing you to deal extra damage (for a limited time), it will instead allow you to gain two levels of ground control instead of one on the first attack you make during a war. The downside would be that during the first attack, tanks will have an additive combat value modifier of -20%. (All you need to do to counter blitzkrieg is to have massive amounts of tanks, just ask the Russians during the Battle of Kursk) 2. In the event you make an attack where after the attack, your opponent no longer has any ground forces (soldiers and tanks), whether this is due to you wiping out their ground force, or them not having ground forces in the first place, then an immense triumph will add three levels of ground control instead of one. I acknowledge that this new mechanic may make ground forces too OP, as airforces are right now, so there could also be a similar system with air superiority.

I don't really count people who didn't really fight as "war deserters". I was going to say AGAINST because we all know how IQ sphere did in Ayyslamic Crusade but it's risky lol.

Welcome the Imperial Guard! An alliance that's totally not a command economy alliance. We’re also founded by not one, not two, not three, but FOUR kebabs. Wonder why KT hasn’t done anything. Oh wait, they’re still getting laid. And... they have a kebab in their alliance. A COMMIE Kebab. Who knew that would be KT. If you haven’t realized that we’re themed after the Imperium of Man, then you must either be a micro runner (i obviously mean ones ran by noobs) or brain dead (or both maybe because they are interchangeable words). Disclaimer: We aren’t in any way associated with the old alliance “Imperium of Man”, they’ve been gone for a while (although I myself knew quite a bit of people who were in that alliance). Emperor: Aurora High Lord: Denia Primarch of Foreign Affairs: Kebab Primarch of Propaganda (recruitment for the basic minds): HaxBaba Primarch of Internal Affairs: Iteo Primarch of Military Affairs: Longsilver High Commander of Foreign Affairs: Agamemnon High Commander of Propaganda: Deadpool (literally all he needs to do is copy and paste ads) High Commander of Internal Affairs: Shadow Auditore High Commander of War: Yami We’re protected by the entirety of IQ, except for that one alliance that always goes “aloha snackbar” (or more famously “ayy lmao”). Nuff said.

I'm pretty sure I've seen him get reported and banned for multis. So yea, this is technically a reroll but he's still a noob.

Regime in a nutshell:

We do cuz we're efficient at planning. Plus, how would you know who would be in who's range without militarization?

Fite me

Hmm... I guess an increase of 19k alliance score over the past few weeks means we're planning to attack someone. *cough*cough TKR went up 100k alliance score over the past few weeks.

Haha! You guys are good at making up false excuses to declare war. As you can tell, we weren't prepared for war at all. No matter, let's dance.

TRF calling themselves commies? Ha! NPO and BK with their command economy are the real commies!

You're right, those stats aren't a point for me. But even then, it's better than what any IQ guy could muster.

@Esentia Wow, you did 400 infra damage congrats. Definitely not better than getting 2000 infra shitted by one guy.

Also, don't forget IoM and AO both singlehandedly defeated all of IQ (plus Acadia and OWR). It's no wonder that IQ paid $500 mil to get IoM and AO to leave them alone.

@PheonixYou're the only person in the entire BK that is even following this strat. Look at all of your idiot friends. They actually tried to beige! Heck, one guy even attacked a second time because he was salty. Suck it! You're bad!

Translation: we can't win because we don't just throw bodies into the battlefield, we use actual guns.

Oh now you say that it's a waste of money. I must admit what you said about big nations not caring as much about smaller nations is true. But it is much easier for big nations to fund repairs for small nations than small nations to fund repairs for big nations. As a small nation myself, I don't see anything wrong with that. According to your logic though, we should surrender because a quarter of us are getting rekted while the rest of us are just destroying. Definitely not better than having a majority of your allies getting rekted. You think our alliance leaders don't give a shit? They're online all day, responding whenever we need them. Plus, since when were alliance leaders capable of doing everything? Unlike you guys, who rely on the government to do everything for you, we can take care of ourselves. You essentially refuted what you said earlier. If it was a waste to remilitarize, why you guys so afraid of it?

Last time I checked, nobody has infra worth destroying. The fact you don't have infra is why people 1 ship beige you. It's because it's not worth wasting the gas and munitions on trying to destroy your infra. Meanwhile, some of your idiot friends are using planes to attack infra (and i mean full strength planes). If you guys are all about not beiging well its backfiring for you pretty badly. You talk about it being bad to beige someone but we do it all the time because you guys don't remilitarize anyways.

Not surprising. They were born IQ, raised IQ, and they will die IQ as well.

So now that this war is over, who wants to have a vote? I'll gladly make the ballot if anyone does.

You clearly don't like this game seeing how many suggestions you're making. If you want a game like the way you imagine it, then program your own. Stop bothering Alex with your bullcrap suggestions, he made it the way it is because its his choice, not yours.

Why doesn't Acadia just legalize raiding of their members? Firstly, its a distinctive point of alliance and cultural identity. Getting raided is an iconic event in Acadia. We can say "there was a mass raid today" and you already know with reasonable certainty which alliance it happened in. It's comparable to saying "some dumb noob made an alliance yesterday"; to say which alliance it occurred in is essentially redundant due to it being a proud allusive icon of the team. Like poor leadership and glorified weakness, it would be delusional to pretend getting mass raided are not a unique figure of alliance heritage to stand out among other IQ aligned alliances. As such, it should be legalised or at least decriminalised in order to preserve this cultural tradition. Secondly, due to the fun nature of the act and the large bounty attached to it, most perpetrators end up getting free loot after partaking in the raid. It is clear from the past statistics that countering will not prevent this fun act, but will instead lead to increased number of hungry nations and compound the already disturbing rate of new raiding alliances in Orbis. Both these figures can be mediated through the decriminalisation of raiding of members. Finally, it seems as if the act of a mass raiding, in a perverse sense, a symbol of unity and bonding that can provide common ground for the traditionally severe dichotomy of Arrgh and Terminal Jest. Through the fun acts of mass raiding committed by both these groups, Acadian members may finally come to realize that the true issue is not which merciless, jealous alliance you pay to not raid you, but rather how much of a delusional schizophrenic you are. This moment of epiphany has the power to break down traditional barriers and allow you, as an alliance, to advance to the top 10 and begin considering more important issues. It just seems as if legalize raiding of members is the right thing to do.

My max space allowed is getting ever smaller, but like it or not, SALT is now the official title.

Surrender before you all die by the sword, for I do not wish you to perish.