You All Can Stop Now

[Beatrix]

Since you won't understand this game, how it works, or even why....... ANYONE who gets multiple wars declared against them will end up LOSING! The game is more about the team effort, using the first strike and out numbering your enemy.

 

If what your saying is Alpha will lose everytime if it is stacked against an alliance with 100 members? Congrats here is a gold star.

 

Now will that alliance like Alpha deal more damage than it recieved? Everytime. Hate us for being interested in a way to "win" in our own right? Or just mad that with 5 times the members you still can't do the job right? I know, your just mad cause we don't lay down and die. Even while we stand with zero infra, you lose whole cities. Feel free to further engage me on how I'm wrong and you are the best for winning. I rather enjoy helping the pathological liars realize truth. I also teach blind mice to read. I have even been awarded for my efforts on teaching apes to go.....apeshi t.

 

This is a bunch of nonsense. 

 

 

1) Paying for the project, the cost of building nukes and maintaining them, especially when half of them are being spied out - cost more than the infrastructure they destroy. 

2) The war was winnable by the aggressor if they had planned it better, were more active, and... you guessed it - didn't build nukes and ships.

3) Nuking your opponent is a terrible idea in a large scale war because it decreases their score without affecting their millitary significantly, gives them 5 free days to rebuild and invulnerability from new wars and isn't even worth it.

 

If your goal is to inflict as much damage as possible to a bunch of high-infra farms, regardless of the consequences then yes - nukes are effective. That was not Alpha or its role in the war from my perspective.

 

I also took interest and NK, in the previous war, took over twice as much infra damage than their opponents on the Syndisphere, so you didn't "win" in your own way. You lost badly.

 

 

I'll give credit that Alpha did more damage than it received(infra-wise) but that probably boils down to Alpha being a relatively small alliance.

[Kastor]

This is a bunch of nonsense. 

 

 

1) Paying for the project, the cost of building nukes and maintaining them, especially when half of them are being spied out - cost more than the infrastructure they destroy. 

2) The war was winnable by the aggressor if they had planned it better, were more active, and... you guessed it - didn't build nukes and ships.

3) Nuking your opponent is a terrible idea in a large scale war because it decreases their score without affecting their millitary significantly, gives them 5 free days to rebuild and invulnerability from new wars and isn't even worth it.

 

If your goal is to inflict as much damage as possible to a bunch of high-infra farms, regardless of the consequences then yes - nukes are effective. That was not Alpha or its role in the war from my perspective.

 

I also took interest and NK, in the previous war, took over twice as much infra damage than their opponents on the Syndisphere, so you didn't "win" in your own way. You lost badly.

 

 

I'll give credit that Alpha did more damage than it received(infra-wise) but that probably boils down to Alpha being a relatively small alliance.

1. Yes, however they usually nuke all your cities, which results in you adopting low infra builds, and getting less money from it, and in turn, less cities. Which is why Rose and TEst have a higher average city count than say, tS. Yes tS is bigger, but Rose has larger city nations.

 

2. Building nukes doesn't hurt you, playing and fighting to rely on your nukes does. Ships hurt because they increase your score astronomically, on that you are correct.

 

3. It actually does very little to their score now that infra is worthless. It does give 5 days which is why it's bad.

[LostWorld]

The war is over. Long live the war.

[Aerys Targaryen]

Since you won't understand this game, how it works, or even why....... ANYONE who gets multiple wars declared against them will end up LOSING! The game is more about the team effort, using the first strike and out numbering your enemy.

 

If what your saying is Alpha will lose everytime if it is stacked against an alliance with 100 members? Congrats here is a gold star.

 

Now will that alliance like Alpha deal more damage than it recieved? Everytime. Hate us for being interested in a way to "win" in our own right? Or just mad that with 5 times the members you still can't do the job right? I know, your just mad cause we don't lay down and die. Even while we stand with zero infra, you lose whole cities. Feel free to further engage me on how I'm wrong and you are the best for winning. I rather enjoy helping the pathological liars realize truth. I also teach blind mice to read. I have even been awarded for my efforts on teaching apes to go.....apeshi t.

 

You are trying desperately to enlighten me from the beginning lol. I already replied to your comments saying "Alpha got declared by 100 nations", that's pure non sense, if you are still going to keep saying that, you are just an idiot. Speaking of Chola, we declared around 17 wars with just 7 or 8 nations. The only advantage we had is, first strike.

 

You are just typing "this game involves team effort", but do you really understand what team effort means? Take your NK nations for example, they had terrible team effort, some of them fought with conventional military, others fought with just nukes, you guys are completely dispersed in score range. If the purpose of NK or Alpha entering the war is to help and relieve their allies (so that they can build up their military back again), then you did a really bad job. If your objective is to just burn our infra, then, meh not bad.

 

According to yoso's stats, (infra destroyed / infra lost) for NK is 1.26. Fark, Guardian, Mensa, CS they all did much better than you alliance. It's not a bad number though, but still not that great.

[Beatrix]

1. Yes, however they usually nuke all your cities, which results in you adopting low infra builds, and getting less money from it, and in turn, less cities. Which is why Rose and TEst have a higher average city count than say, tS. Yes tS is bigger, but Rose has larger city nations.

 

2. Building nukes doesn't hurt you, playing and fighting to rely on your nukes does. Ships hurt because they increase your score astronomically, on that you are correct.

 

3. It actually does very little to their score now that infra is worthless. It does give 5 days which is why it's bad.

 

1. The income generated in war doesn't really matter. 'Adopting low infra builds' is not because of nukes, it's because you never get the RoI on high infra purchases which makes them a total waste of money. Comparing the amount of 'average cities' is a terrible metric and proves absolutely nothing.

 

2. Building nukes hurts you, it's a waste of resources and money pre-war, and using them(assuming they aren't spied away) helps your opponent.

 

3. Every little thing counts. You'll be surprised how many instances there are of nations being ~10-15 TS points away from down declaring on you.

[Kastor]

1. The income generated in war doesn't really matter. 'Adopting low infra builds' is not because of nukes, it's because you never get the RoI on high infra purchases which makes them a total waste of money. Comparing the amount of 'average cities' is a terrible metric and proves absolutely nothing.

 

2. Building nukes hurts you, it's a waste of resources and money pre-war, and using them(assuming they aren't spied away) helps your opponent.

 

3. Every little thing counts. You'll be surprised how many instances there are of nations being ~10-15 TS points away from down declaring on you.

lol you really don't know what you're talking about.

 

1.You get your RoI if you have enough cities and infra that you sit out a war. Your side never sits out a war because you have less average cities. Average cities is definitely not a terrible metric and now that you've said that I'm looking at you a little differently. High infra isn't bad if you have the cities for it, which Alpha/some NK nations do. Average city count proves everything, the "mid tier" is roughly 10-14 cities atm, maybe more 11-15 now. Syndisphere gets the advantage here by having the most mid tier nations, you can't be declared on in a lot of cases yet you can updeclare. Syndisphere, especially BK, has mastered the art of the updeclare, and I give them credit for that. So average city count counts for everything.

 

2. If you've got a good warchest, building a few nukes doesn't "hurt" you. If you feel that it hurts your nation, it's because you have a lack of WC. Nukes are bad to use it war, yes, but you never know when you'll get countered and beat down, then you csn do some damage.

 

3. Then wouldn't it help you that you got nuked? Beige and now you're out of the attackers range.

[Apeman]

Oh my god, I just realized I was wrong all along. Thank you for showing me the way. You are all the best and smartest people I have never met. Please continue to tell me the way to run my nation and tell me that you are doing it right while I'm doing it wrong. It's really sinking in now. I can't believe I have been zero infra a few times already and never figured out what build is best for my nation.

 

So let me get this straight.....you hit us, we lay there and die? Hit us with multiple times our members and we just lay there? Once our military is gone we should just lay there and let you beat us up with no retaliation? That makes sense.

 

Please be patient, I'm just a simple ape clearly doing it all wrong.

 

Hey aerys, you really are the best. Can you sign my tits? I have never been this close to someone as great as you.

 

See you soon

[Aerys Targaryen]

Oh my god, I just realized I was wrong all along. Thank you for showing me the way. You are all the best and smartest people I have never met. Please continue to tell me the way to run my nation and tell me that you are doing it right while I'm doing it wrong. It's really sinking in now. I can't believe I have been zero infra a few times already and never figured out what build is best for my nation.

 

So let me get this straight.....you hit us, we lay there and die? Hit us with multiple times our members and we just lay there? Once our military is gone we should just lay there and let you beat us up with no retaliation? That makes sense.

 

Please be patient, I'm just a simple ape clearly doing it all wrong.

 

Hey aerys, you really are the best. Can you sign my tits? I have never been this close to someone as great as you.

 

See you soon

 

It's been a pleasure !

 

*Takes out a pen*

 

Now show me your tits

[tehreno]

Good war.  Lots of fun.

[Beatrix]

lol you really don't know what you're talking about.

 

1.You get your RoI if you have enough cities and infra that you sit out a war. Your side never sits out a war because you have less average cities. Average cities is definitely not a terrible metric and now that you've said that I'm looking at you a little differently. High infra isn't bad if you have the cities for it, which Alpha/some NK nations do. Average city count proves everything, the "mid tier" is roughly 10-14 cities atm, maybe more 11-15 now. Syndisphere gets the advantage here by having the most mid tier nations, you can't be declared on in a lot of cases yet you can updeclare. Syndisphere, especially BK, has mastered the art of the updeclare, and I give them credit for that. So average city count counts for everything.

 

2. If you've got a good warchest, building a few nukes doesn't "hurt" you. If you feel that it hurts your nation, it's because you have a lack of WC. Nukes are bad to use it war, yes, but you never know when you'll get countered and beat down, then you csn do some damage.

 

3. Then wouldn't it help you that you got nuked? Beige and now you're out of the attackers range.

 

>mfw even after multiple wars all of this was proven wrong, it's still being said

 

1. "My side" is not relevant, because "My side" was not involved in the war. High infra is always bad regardless of the amount of cities because they don't pay for themselves. 

You were wrong to assume that "my side" builds low infra because of nukes.

 

It literally doesn't matter how many cities you have to calculate the RoI.

 

2. Any resource that is dedicated towards nukes that can instead be used for you or your alliance hurts, the amount of which it "hurts" you varies, if Alpha has 25 members that built nukes, that is 1.25b in costs for the project, not including resources. Once you include resources, or that fact that each nuke costs 1.5m and 30k+ to maintain every day you get pretty insane amounts. Especially so if you consider the alternative usage of this money

 

3. Yes, it helps being nuked. Being nuked is quite literally a good thing in most cases. 

[James II]

 

3. Yes, it helps being nuked. Being nuked is quite literally a good thing in most cases. 

If it helps you, then quit !@#$ing about us having nukes.

Edited October 17, 2016 by James II

[CrispyGeneral]

This topic is hurting my eyes just looking at it. It truly is over. This thread is dead.