Kastor Posted April 17, 2017 Share Posted April 17, 2017 Best? Rose, Lordaeron, tS, Acadia, BK, and Mensa. All those alliances are doing above average for what was handed to them, whether it be damage, or just score ranges. Look at the stats if you don't believe me. Worst? I'd say TCW, UPN, The Fed, tFP. All those alliances could be doing more for their side. Everyone seems average to me, tbh. SK got smacked night one before update even happened and TKR's net damage is barely positive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cypher Posted April 17, 2017 Share Posted April 17, 2017 (edited) TCW is definitely far from the worst. They're one of the few alliances that are switching to new fronts every now and then just to nullify any sort of force their enemies could muster. UPN on the other hand are doing nothing. They have very few offensive wars, have barely caused a dent in their enemies and are waiting for their turn to get hit by someone like TKR or TCW. Edited April 17, 2017 by Cypher 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted April 17, 2017 Share Posted April 17, 2017 TCW has been awesome considering the tier they're fighting in. 1 Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quichwe10 Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 (edited) Best? Rose, Lordaeron, tS, Acadia, BK, and Mensa. All those alliances are doing above average for what was handed to them, whether it be damage, or just score ranges. Look at the stats if you don't believe me. Worst? I'd say TCW, UPN, The Fed, tFP. All those alliances could be doing more for their side. Everyone seems average to me, tbh. SK got smacked night one before update even happened and TKR's net damage is barely positive. So, what should TFP do in order to do better in the war? You do remember TFP is basically a micro alliance. I actually think they've done decently. I thought it was going to be all over when Lordaeron knocked on the door with some high explosives and lead and that TFP would resemble a dust blown wasteland after the first two-three days. Edited April 18, 2017 by Quichwe10 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thalmor Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 So, what should TFP do in order to do better in the war? You do remember TFP is basically a micro alliance. I actually think they've done decently. I thought it was going to be all over when Lordaeron knocked on the door with some high explosives and lead and that TFP would resemble a dust blown wasteland after the first two-three days. While it is cool that you guys actually decided to do something this war, you can't get pissy over criticism and then fall back behind the 'we're a micro' defense when you decide to play with the big boys in major wars like this- especially while you have 30 members in the middle to upper tier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8mrgrim8 Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 While it is cool that you guys actually decided to do something this war, you can't get pissy over criticism and then fall back behind the 'we're a micro' defense when you decide to play with the big boys in major wars like this- especially while you have 30 members in the middle to upper tier. But they did take on Lord A aron without much support until today. No one was available in range and they were left to counter for themselves Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quichwe10 Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 (edited) While it is cool that you guys actually decided to do something this war, you can't get pissy over criticism and then fall back behind the 'we're a micro' defense when you decide to play with the big boys in major wars like this- especially while you have 30 members in the middle to upper tier. I didn't actually mean it to be pissy sounding or a complaint. I'd actually like to know what we need to do in order to become more effective in this war. Also... we're considered mid to upper tier? That's actually news to me, considering we have 30 members and three of them are below 200 points. I guess our superior might in the range of 500-400 score will make us relevant. Also, building a better offensive military doctrine beyond knowing that there's someone who's fighting us and we need to fight them would also be quite nice to do. Edited April 18, 2017 by Quichwe10 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anneal Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 WTF are actually doing a decently job. Best: TKR, Pantheon, TCW, Rose, Lordaeron Worst: BK (infra damage wise, they have a dreadful ratio), Zodiac, SK, Polaris, VE, NPO (not doing enough to actually carry their side) So basically "Best: Syndisphere, Worst: Non-Syndisphere". Lordaeron is alright but they're certainly not "winning" as they think they are, and they're getting it pretty bad. Rose is doing pretty good, and you can't really say BK is doing bad. Some of our members are getting it hard but mid-tier and low-tier are holding on fine. To be really honest though, BK has always been sort of a mid-tier alliance and the lack of a larger upper tier ended up doing some harm to us in this war. SK is getting it rather bad, though. Also, you have to give t$ credit, they actually fought several alliances at once, initially without help, and held on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cypher Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 So basically "Best: Syndisphere, Worst: Non-Syndisphere". Lordaeron is alright but they're certainly not "winning" as they think they are, and they're getting it pretty bad. Rose is doing pretty good, and you can't really say BK is doing bad. Some of our members are getting it hard but mid-tier and low-tier are holding on fine. To be really honest though, BK has always been sort of a mid-tier alliance and the lack of a larger upper tier ended up doing some harm to us in this war. SK is getting it rather bad, though. Also, you have to give t$ credit, they actually fought several alliances at once, initially without help, and held on. You can't really put alliances that are out damaging and therefore winning in the loser catergory. Are there alliances in Syndisphere that haven't given it their 100% and could have done better? Of course. And Lordaeron and Acadia are doing comparatively better than anyone else in your coalition (except maybe NPO but I'll get onto that). They've held their ground for a few days without support and are just simply unlucky to be surrounded by alliances that clearly do not know what they are doing. You've got alliances that used to be in Syndisphere so they shouldn't have used all the tips and experiences they've gathered to create a proper, fully functioning coalition. Don't plan to lose in the first round and you guys wouldn't be here. Allocate targets properly and also don't lump 7 random alliances on one alliance but then leave one of the heaviest hitters unmarked. The only redeeming factors of BK and NPO's involvement in this war is that they can hold down the lower tier no matter who they're facing. Anything out of the lower tier and it is completely the two alliance's fault for letting the mid tier crumble. BK has been vastly outdamaged by their opponents (go check the stat tracker, albeit it's unreliable at times), even as far as to lose more infra in one day than half of your coalition has during the entire war up to now. NPO's non existent mid tier has led to them doing miniscule amounts of damage in a tier that strategically makes very little sense to hold onto. And one final thing to note, one alliance that I forgot to add to the best catergory is Acadia. Lord knows why they're still allied to UPN et al when it's clear they're miles ahead of them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thalmor Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 But they did take on Lord A aron without much support until today. No one was available in range and they were left to counter for themselves I didn't actually mean it to be pissy sounding or a complaint. I'd actually like to know what we need to do in order to become more effective in this war. Also... we're considered mid to upper tier? That's actually news to me, considering we have 30 members and three of them are below 200 points. I guess our superior might in the range of 500-400 score will make us relevant. Also, building a better offensive military doctrine beyond knowing that there's someone who's fighting us and we need to fight them would also be quite nice to do. I wasn't trying to criticize TFP's fighting capacity or ignore their successes in this war. I perceived Quichwe10's response a certain way and just responded to it in a way I saw fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post NickFury Posted April 18, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted April 18, 2017 Worst? I'd say TCW, UPN, The Fed, tFP. All those alliances could be doing more for their side. Everyone seems average to me, tbh. SK got smacked night one before update even happened and TKR's net damage is barely positive. Considering the fact the Fed was countered by HBE, we're doing good. Oh, then there's this. Probably shouldn't let Joey handle FA, but he does fit right in with your government. 19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kastor Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 You can't really put alliances that are out damaging and therefore winning in the loser catergory. Are there alliances in Syndisphere that haven't given it their 100% and could have done better? Of course. And Lordaeron and Acadia are doing comparatively better than anyone else in your coalition (except maybe NPO but I'll get onto that). They've held their ground for a few days without support and are just simply unlucky to be surrounded by alliances that clearly do not know what they are doing. You've got alliances that used to be in Syndisphere so they shouldn't have used all the tips and experiences they've gathered to create a proper, fully functioning coalition. Don't plan to lose in the first round and you guys wouldn't be here. Allocate targets properly and also don't lump 7 random alliances on one alliance but then leave one of the heaviest hitters unmarked. The only redeeming factors of BK and NPO's involvement in this war is that they can hold down the lower tier no matter who they're facing. Anything out of the lower tier and it is completely the two alliance's fault for letting the mid tier crumble. BK has been vastly outdamaged by their opponents (go check the stat tracker, albeit it's unreliable at times), even as far as to lose more infra in one day than half of your coalition has during the entire war up to now. NPO's non existent mid tier has led to them doing miniscule amounts of damage in a tier that strategically makes very little sense to hold onto. And one final thing to note, one alliance that I forgot to add to the best catergory is Acadia. Lord knows why they're still allied to UPN et al when it's clear they're miles ahead of them. Yeah, we started to take some heat when tS was able to downdeclare without fear. :/ Considering the fact the Fed was countered by HBE, we're doing good. Oh, then there's this. Probably shouldn't let Joey handle FA, but he does fit right in with your government. #Joey4HighKing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anneal Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 The only redeeming factors of BK and NPO's involvement in this war is that they can hold down the lower tier no matter who they're facing. Anything out of the lower tier and it is completely the two alliance's fault for letting the mid tier crumble. BK has been vastly outdamaged by their opponents (go check the stat tracker, albeit it's unreliable at times), even as far as to lose more infra in one day than half of your coalition has during the entire war up to now. NPO's non existent mid tier has led to them doing miniscule amounts of damage in a tier that strategically makes very little sense to hold onto. Part of it though was because of the botched blitz at the start of the war. The server got messed up and for a good moment the alliance was disoriented and the whole conflict got off to a shaky start. Also, BK never really had a serious and solid upper tier, even way back when I was in the alliance in 2015, save for some isolated high score nations that made for easy targets. That's where most of our infra was lost in this war, since they lacked support. The mid-tier isn't actually doing so bad for BK, it's more like anything above it and we're getting it rough. BK's going to definitely take an L this time, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 NPOs strat is to updeclare from where they are at. That would be possible with the previous war mechanic, but this new one with Resistance and Fortify changes it a lot. Plus it's just hard to maintain updeclare threat with only 9-10 cities. Arrgh pulled it off in the past against Mensa pretty well but that was due to us knocking them down too fast and they maintain all their cities. 1 Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
durmij Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 Considering the fact the Fed was countered by HBE, we're doing good. Oh, then there's this. Probably shouldn't let Joey handle FA, but he does fit right in with your government. Jesus this is low, even for lordaeron. 5 Quote https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjI4ROuPyuY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUUEHv8GHcE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8mrgrim8 Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 You can't really put alliances that are out damaging and therefore winning in the loser catergory. Are there alliances in Syndisphere that haven't given it their 100% and could have done better? Of course. And Lordaeron and Acadia are doing comparatively better than anyone else in your coalition (except maybe NPO but I'll get onto that). They've held their ground for a few days without support and are just simply unlucky to be surrounded by alliances that clearly do not know what they are doing. You've got alliances that used to be in Syndisphere so they shouldn't have used all the tips and experiences they've gathered to create a proper, fully functioning coalition. Don't plan to lose in the first round and you guys wouldn't be here. Allocate targets properly and also don't lump 7 random alliances on one alliance but then leave one of the heaviest hitters unmarked. Who did they not blitz? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crust Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 Jesus this is low, even for lordaeron. It's not low if you're already at the bottom! 4 Quote It's my birthday today, and I'm 33! That means only one thing...BRING IT IN, GUYS! *every character from every game, comic, cartoon, TV show, movie, and book reality come in with everything for a HUGE party* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quichwe10 Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 (edited) It's fine Thalmor. I read my previous post, and I can definitely see how you'd get that image. Make it a little more defensive, little higher pitched, and boom, sounds a lot more like I'm whining. Also, drawing some funny looks from my family after I saw Nickfury's reply to Lordaeron's offer to merge. Edited April 18, 2017 by Quichwe10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roquentin Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 Who did they not blitz? He's talking about TKR, not understanding the political considerations involved with that. Additionally, it doesn't really seem too evident to him that the point of the mass hit on tS was to disrupt their all planes strategy which got messed up by the server glitch, since the additional MAP was crucial which severely complicated the front and left them with clogged up defensive slots. If you plan an attack based on game mechanics being functional and they aren't, it will go badly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 He's talking about TKR, not understanding the political considerations involved with that. Additionally, it doesn't really seem too evident to him that the point of the mass hit on tS was to disrupt their all planes strategy which got messed up by the server glitch, since the additional MAP was crucial which severely complicated the front and left them with clogged up defensive slots. If you plan an attack based on game mechanics being functional and they aren't, it will go badly. The server screw up messed up both sides pretty good, honestly. But there's also Guardian and Coalition that are pretty big hitters too, that didn't blitzed. Then of course the various protectorates and micro alliances tied in, that had some crucial counters. 1 Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhuto Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 to be honest TFP doing pretty good given the oppositions they are facing on lower tiers And I will go a bit ahead and say TFP, TCW, Guardian , tC , CF are the reason why even 7 alliances are not able to pin down t$ 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roquentin Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 (edited) The server screw up messed up both sides pretty good, honestly. But there's also Guardian and Coalition that are pretty big hitters too, that didn't blitzed. Then of course the various protectorates and micro alliances tied in, that had some crucial counters. With tS it was a lot more important for it to work due to the all planes thing. There was never going to be an answer to Guardian, Pantheon upper tier, GOB, TCW, upper tier or tC given the relative of lack of upper tier nations. I think the consolidation of the upper tier on your side in the last 8 months or so would show that. Most of the people who were in range of those knew going in they'd take a pounding. Edited April 18, 2017 by Roquentin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boony Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 With tS it was a lot more important for it to work due to the all planes thing. There was never going to be an answer to Guardian, TCW upper tier, or tC given the relative of lack of upper tier nations. I think the consolidation of the upper tier on your side in the last 8 months or so would show that. Most of the people who were in range of those knew going in they'd take a pounding. Upper tier doesn't mean much. Mid tier matters. TS side has always lost the upper tier, but won the mid tier. Let me know who's winning that battle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kastor Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 Upper tier doesn't mean much. Mid tier matters. TS side has always lost the upper tier, but won the mid tier. Let me know who's winning that battle. Depends on how long the war goes on most likely. Next Round will be rough for both but you'll probably "win" after that, who knows? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boony Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 Depends on how long the war goes on most likely. Next Round will be rough for both but you'll probably "win" after that, who knows? Way better than the previous lopsided wars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.