The war so far

[Anneal]

Did I see people say that the server breaking had little to no impact on the war? That's just plain wrong.

The entire blitz revolves around a turn change so that we can ground attack, get the turn to change, then airstrike so we can gain both superiorities. When the turn didn't change, it allowed for counters on the turn that lasted for a further two hours, a huge window for syndisphere coordination. To downplay this opportunity is nothing but idiotic. When counters got in, it disabled our ability to gain air control against our initial targets, and thus they destroyed our air within a day because both sides could rebuy their air instead of just the Inquisition side. That's the 'attackers advantage', the ability to surprise and overwhelm the enemy before buying military again and wiping the floor with your opponent. Considering we couldn't do that because of the potato server frying, it allowed the t$ side to coordinate and effectively win that front after talking to allies about relieving pressure.

This entire debacle could have happened completely differently had the server not fried. Sure, chock it up to 'muh skills' or 'git gud' or 'haha don't dogpile on one alliance fam haha how are blitzes real just counter them haha' but this really impacted the way this war went down, admit it or not, that's the bare honest truth.

Except the defending alliances were also affected and had one less MAP as well. The server glitch did affect our blitz and force us to change plans but blaming current disadvantages on that is simply an excuse. People aren't saying the glitch had little impact, it's more that certain alliances are completely blaming it on that one thing.

 

Of course a fair bit of this topic is throwing salt, but even if the blitz worked well and there was no glitch some of our alliances were getting rolled anyways because of poor upper tier organization and cooperation. You can argue our mid and lower tier are doing fine but you can't win wars by just updeclaring.

[Kemal Ergenekon]

Roquentin, please...

 

Are you Clarke? Or maybe Clarke's sister? This "my members are inactive and they suck, that's why we lost" crap is really getting old. If you did not think you were going to win, why did you attack in the first place? The answer is that you believed you could win, and you lost. And now you are blaming it on your members instead of your blocs inability to manage the war. Shameless.

 

Isn't NPO basically active players from another game? With that background, you should be at least as active as Mensa. You are just bad at inference. Your 9-city strategy is BS with the current score system, and that's one of the reasons your alliance sucks. Not inactivity.

 

As for "easy mode" -- against such incompetence, Mensa is playing on perma-easy mode. We are just here for the salt story, xdxd.

[Roquentin]

Roquentin, please...

 

Are you Clarke? Or maybe Clarke's sister? This "my members are inactive and they suck, that's why we lost" crap is really getting old. If you did not think you were going to win, why did you attack in the first place? The answer is that you believed you could win, and you lost. And now you are blaming it on your members instead of your blocs inability to manage the war. Shameless.

 

Isn't NPO basically active players from another game? With that background, you should be at least as active as Mensa. You are just bad at inference. Your 9-city strategy is BS with the current score system, and that's one of the reasons your alliance sucks. Not inactivity.

 

As for "easy mode" -- against such incompetence, Mensa is playing on perma-easy mode. We are just here for the salt story, xdxd.

 

I don't expect everyone to be an active on the level of Mensa. Again, it is always better to attack first regardless than be on the defensive if there is a risk of losing. "How dare they attack us and risk losing when we wan to roll them?" is basically the same thing you said last time.

 

I don't think I ever talked about our activity, and we don't generally only bring people who happen to be super active. We are a genuine mass alliance and that comes with its ups and downs. There are alliances on our side like Lordaeron who are more active and alliances that are less active. It's not the same as Syndisphere where most of the core alliances are more active on average. I was talking about the war as a whole and not just us.

 

Basically, this is just a typical hyper dismissive Kemal post, which missed the point entirely. Whoosh.

[Darth Revan]

I don't expect everyone to be an active on the level of Mensa. Again, it is always better to attack first regardless than be on the defensive if there is a risk of losing. "How dare they attack us and risk losing when we wan to roll them?" is basically the same thing you said last time.

 

I don't think I ever talked about our activity, and we don't generally only bring people who happen to be super active. We are a genuine mass alliance and that comes with its ups and downs. There are alliances on our side like Lordaeron who are more active and alliances that are less active. It's not the same as Syndisphere where most of the core alliances are more active on average. I was talking about the war as a whole and not just us.

 

Basically, this is just a typical hyper dismissive Kemal post, which missed the point entirely. Whoosh.

Git gud 

[Kemal Ergenekon]

I don't expect everyone to be an active on the level of Mensa. Again, it is always better to attack first regardless than be on the defensive if there is a risk of losing. "How dare they attack us and risk losing when we wan to roll them?" is basically the same thing you said last time.

 

I don't think I ever talked about our activity, and we don't generally only bring people who happen to be super active. We are a genuine mass alliance and that comes with its ups and downs. There are alliances on our side like Lordaeron who are more active and alliances that are less active. It's not the same as Syndisphere where most of the core alliances are more active on average. I was talking about the war as a whole and not just us.

 

Basically, this is just a typical hyper dismissive Kemal post, which missed the point entirely. Whoosh.

 

"I don't think I ever talked about our activity"

 

Then what is this?

 

 

 

I'll repeat what the main differences are

 

1. Most substantial nations are lethargic and only playing because they have been around for a long time and it is a pain to get them to do anything due to them no longer wanting to fit it in.

2. Most players in mainstream alliances are inactive as well.

3. I don't want to commit the time to trying to move inactive players around when most of the coalition will be uncommitted to the cause in any remotely even war and not help us get things done, which became increasingly the case in the past 4 years.

4. I don't claim it's dynamic or interesting or brag about it.

 

 

You admit that you do not want to spend the time to make your own alliance members more active, which implies you think they are inactive. But now we are leaving Roquentin Blameshifting Phase I (blame alliance members) to Roquentin Blameshifting Phase II (blame allies). We will soon reach Roquentin Blameshifting Phase III: blame enemies for literally killing the game.

 

Never disappoint, pal.

Edited April 18, 2017 by Kemal Ergenekon

[Vack]

It's worse to defend when at a perceived disadvantage than to attack.

 

Oh so having a 300 nation advantage no longer counts as an advantage?

[Roquentin]

"I don't think I ever talked about our activity"

 

Then what is this?

 

 

 

 

You admit that you do not want to spend the time to make your own alliance members more active, which implies you think they are inactive. But now we are leaving Roquentin Blameshifting Phase I (blame alliance members) to Roquentin Blameshifting Phase II (blame allies). We will soon reach Roquentin Blameshifting Phase III: blame enemies for literally killing the game.

 

Never disappoint, pal.

 

It was a response to Mogar about something else. Whoosh again. You're not arguing in good faith, so not gonna bother. Have fun with the usual bragadoccio.

 

 

 

 

Oh so having a 300 nation advantage no longer counts as an advantage?

 

Depends on where those nations are in terms of score and activity can factor in as well. It's not a massive advantage you paint it as.

[Spaceman Thrax]

Did I see people say that the server breaking had little to no impact on the war? That's just plain wrong.

 

The entire blitz revolves around a turn change so that we can ground attack, get the turn to change, then airstrike so we can gain both superiorities. When the turn didn't change, it allowed for counters on the turn that lasted for a further two hours, a huge window for syndisphere coordination. To downplay this opportunity is nothing but idiotic. When counters got in, it disabled our ability to gain air control against our initial targets, and thus they destroyed our air within a day because both sides could rebuy their air instead of just the Inquisition side. That's the 'attackers advantage', the ability to surprise and overwhelm the enemy before buying military again and wiping the floor with your opponent. Considering we couldn't do that because of the potato server frying, it allowed the t$ side to coordinate and effectively win that front after talking to allies about relieving pressure.

 

This entire debacle could have happened completely differently had the server not fried. Sure, chock it up to 'muh skills' or 'git gud' or 'haha don't dogpile on one alliance fam haha how are blitzes real just counter them haha' but this really impacted the way this war went down, admit it or not, that's the bare honest truth.

 

Two things. t$ could have still turned that around even having lost both superiorities (I don't want to explain how, but if you don't believe me try assuming that strategy will work again next war ). And also did you guys not use blitzkrieg, which gave you the seventh point anyways?

Edited April 19, 2017 by Spaceman Thrax

[Roquentin]

Two things. t$ could have still turned that around even having lost both superiorities (I don't want to explain how, but if you don't believe me try assuming that strategy will work again next war ). And also did you guys not use blitzkrieg, which gave you the seventh point anyways?

Blitzkrieg does't give the person using it an extra point. It give whoever attacks them an extra point.

[Spaceman Thrax]

Blitzkrieg does't give the person using it an extra point. It give whoever attacks them an extra point.

 

Gotcha, my bad. Never used it. Just the first point then.

[Tim Armstrong]

It's good for everyone to get rolled once in a while. Enjoy bishes!

[LostWorld]

this russian flag guy attacks me... I can understand everything... but the russian flag. this does it. sk must die.

[Kastor]

https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/18505-recognition-of-aggressive-acts/

 

 

We can just go revisit that thread again.

 

This doesn't prove your point you're just grasping at this point.

[Shiho Nishizumi]

Except the defending alliances were also affected and had one less MAP as well. The server glitch did affect our blitz and force us to change plans but blaming current disadvantages on that is simply an excuse. People aren't saying the glitch had little impact, it's more that certain alliances are completely blaming it on that one thing.

 

Of course a fair bit of this topic is throwing salt, but even if the blitz worked well and there was no glitch some of our alliances were getting rolled anyways because of poor upper tier organization and cooperation. You can argue our mid and lower tier are doing fine but you can't win wars by just updeclaring.

 

Anneal's spot on, really. While the servers imploding was a setback for TI's bloc, it isn't the one and only reason for the current situation.

 

Even if they couldn't consolidate both superiorities, they had ground one (if achieved) which made it harder for the defender to harm the attacker's aircraft due to only being able to field two thirds of their air force. So, even while the attacker's first-strike benefits were reduced, it still worked for the attackers; it wasn't a minor thing.

 

As for the 'allowed t$'s side to coordinate with allies to alleviate pressure', it is also the case for TI's side. For example, those were two complete hours that BK could have used to rally in allies to weaken our offensive on them, instead of having them hit on server reset of the following day. That would have spared BK of quite significant attrition from fighting on two fronts, one which was unexpected.

 

All in all, I think that TI's current position is due to faulty attack plans (dogpiling t$ and sieging Rose but not managing to completely pin them alongside MHQ, whilst leaving the heaviest hitter, TKR, essentially unscratched, plus not bothering to preempt us), and those failings were exacerbated by the server shitting on itself. If your situation is starting to look bad in spite of having the first-strike advantage, numbers superiority, military count edge, and surprise factor (tbf, of questionable value because attacks right before server reset are commonplace), it's not only (not even mainly) because the server shitting on itself botched it; it's because you weren't able to utilize your advantages to their fullest (numbers don't really get negated by the server !@#$ up), regardless of the reasons why you weren't able to do so (which includes both game-side faults and player-side misjudgements and error).

Edited April 19, 2017 by Shiho Nishizumi

[Avruch]

Yeah next time they should spread the love around a bit more, maybe skip Mensa and see how that works out. 

[Shiho Nishizumi]

Yeah next time they should spread the love around a bit more, maybe skip Mensa and see how that works out. 

 

They shoulda worshipped Dio harder. They're paying for their infidelity.

[Them]

They shoulda worshipped Dio harder. They're paying for their infidelity.

Yeah. We really should be praising Dio more. I think we have a place on our forums for missionaries of Dio, but it rarely gets used nowadays since people are getting involved with this newfangled "Church of Zoot".

 

While the blitz was executed at a suboptimal time and the Inquisition should have waited before declaring, the leadership generally believed that Syndisphere was planning to blitz them soon and decided to take the initiative themselves. It's reasonable to say that they took quite the FA hit for that decision, but it was made on limited intelligence, which they believed to be accurate. It might be easy to blame failure on elements beyond your control (the servers melting down during the blitz definitely hurt the Inquisition more than Syndisphere), but there is still quite a bit of room for the Inquisition to improve. Also, the poor tier distribution can't necessarily be attributed to bad leadership or planning since most Inquisition alliances have never needed a real "upper tier" (nobody in BK discord can agree on what the tiers are, so I'll just assume that above 16/17 or so cities is upper tier) and upper tier domination allowed Syndisphere to kill off most of the Inquisition's upper-mid tier through down-declares. NPO doesn't care about inefficiencies in its playstyle and most alliances in the Inquisition have generally viewed spending on upper tier nations as wasteful when they could focus on recruitment and increasing funding for lower city levels. The Inquisition will have to adapt its playstyle if they want to have better odds against Syndisphere, but it's their first war as a bloc and they certainly made things more interesting, like they promised to.

 

Oh so having a 300 nation advantage no longer counts as an advantage?

It hasn't counted as an advantage for over a year, m8.

 

Also, only the salty losers complain about advantages. Success justifies all sins and whatnot...

[ArcKnox]

>First war as a bloc

>Literally just OO with NPO instead of TKR
 

smh tbh fam

[Them]

>First war as a bloc

>Literally just OO with NPO instead of TKR

 

smh tbh fam

well, literally OO with NPO instead of TKR declaring on Syndisphere is still pretty new for the game.

[Talostastic]

All this talk about how the glitch at day change screwing up the blitz, and I'm just looking at my own war timeline wondering why nobody declared on me before day change.

 

 

One of the nations deleted themself (happens a surprising number of times) but I still had the notification.

 

Great coordination guys!

Edited April 19, 2017 by Talostastic

[Them]

All this talk about how the glitch at day change screwing up the blitz, and I'm just looking at my own war timeline wondering why nobody declared on me before day change.

 

One of the nations deleted themself (happens a surprising number of times) but I still had the notification.

 

Great coordination guys!

Thanks m80. We pride ourselves on validation.

[Eumirbago]

well, literally OO with NPO instead of TKR declaring on Syndisphere is still pretty new for the game.

 

Yeeeeeee, the new thing is now you are fighting the Most Competent Sphere This Game Will Ever Seeâ„¢ #CurusBKisnotmyBK #BringYosoBack #InQblows #gitclapped

Edited April 19, 2017 by Jacob Moore

[Settra]

Getting Clapped.

 

#clapped

[Them]

#clapped

[Anneal]

All this talk about how the glitch at day change screwing up the blitz, and I'm just looking at my own war timeline wondering why nobody declared on me before day change.

 

One of the nations deleted themself (happens a surprising number of times) but I still had the notification.

 

Great coordination guys!

 

That's happening quite a bit in this war, actually...I had one nation delete on me completely and another just reroll after getting beiged. It's low tier, but it kind of makes it hilarious.