War. War Never Changes.

[Felkey]

4 hours ago, Dubayoo said:

Then what are you waiting for?

Crush the opposition.  Don't peace them out just to let another war come back.  Knock them down, and gradually decommission to downdeclare over and over until they have nothing left.  Recruit more new players as well so it's easier for them to declare war since they have less points committed to cities and infrastructure and more to military units.

They were already broke and there wasn't much left to break, you don't win by doing stupid shit like wasting resources by breaking something that's already broken. 

If you look at the average infra of syndisphere alliances vs iq sphere alliances you'll see how brutal it was on them.

[Dubayoo]

5 minutes ago, Felkey said:

They were already broke and there wasn't much left to break, you don't win by doing stupid shit like wasting resources by breaking something that's already broken. 

If you look at the average infra of syndisphere alliances vs iq sphere alliances you'll see how brutal it was on them.

Just because something's broken right now doesn't mean it's broken forever.

To really win, you have to eliminate your opponent's ability to recover.  If your goal is to win, then you need to come to terms with how you can never be too brutal.

Edited June 27, 2017 by Dubayoo

[hope]

14 hours ago, Buorhann said:

The real travesty to this thread? It had potential to reach the highest of pages, but then the Sheepster decided to force these new forums onto us and reduced the number of pages.

Yes but now every other thread has had its # of pages reduced  keep it going boys 

[Felkey]

10 hours ago, Dubayoo said:

Just because something's broken right now doesn't mean it's broken forever.

To really win, you have to eliminate your opponent's ability to recover.  If your goal is to win, then you need to come to terms with how you can never be too brutal.

We kinda already did that. And wasting resources when there's nothing left to turn to rubble isn't brutality, it's straight stupidity.

[Dubayoo]

2 hours ago, Felkey said:

We kinda already did that. And wasting resources when there's nothing left to turn to rubble isn't brutality, it's straight stupidity.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

Any resources you spend to gradually downdeclare to crush the opposition will save many more resources into the future.  There's nothing stupid about it.

[Anneal]

1 hour ago, Dubayoo said:

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

Any resources you spend to gradually downdeclare to crush the opposition will save many more resources into the future.  There's nothing stupid about it.

Except the problem settles in when most people simply can't downdeclare on you. Anything more than decomming twice faces significant risk, and you can't rely on newer recruits to help pin them down, either. Infra is cheap below 1000 and is easily rebuildable, and trying to hold down someone that low scored is like trying to beige one of your Arrgh friends. At some point you're just going to burn way too much money. 

And you probably haven't seen it yet but certain IQ alliances are still struggling to get back to its pre-war levels. And when they do, most of their members' growth would be very slow; a 5 city member in BK might end up in 8 or 9 cities at the end of the NAP while another 5 city member in Pantheon can easily grow to 12 or 13 cities along with at least a project. 

[Ripper]

52 minutes ago, Anneal said:

Except the problem settles in when most people simply can't downdeclare on you. Anything more than decomming twice faces significant risk, and you can't rely on newer recruits to help pin them down, either. Infra is cheap below 1000 and is easily rebuildable, and trying to hold down someone that low scored is like trying to beige one of your Arrgh friends. At some point you're just going to burn way too much money. 

And you probably haven't seen it yet but certain IQ alliances are still struggling to get back to its pre-war levels. And when they do, most of their members' growth would be very slow; a 5 city member in BK might end up in 8 or 9 cities at the end of the NAP while another 5 city member in Pantheon can easily grow to 12 or 13 cities along with at least a project. 

Why did IQ surrender then?

[Anneal]

2 hours ago, Ripper said:

Why did IQ surrender then?

Pretty sure they were low on money and resources, and while technically they can still fight with their low amounts of infra left in them, Syndisphere could just sit on anywhere higher than 1500 score indefinitely. Not to mention a long war on the losing side kills morale and plenty of members were already leaving or going inactive mid-war. Some alliances lost at least 20 to 30 members from inactivity or desertion. 

[Eumirbago]

Ggrein3

Edited June 27, 2017 by Jay Z

[Dubayoo]

The point is that if IQ's defeated to the point it can't recover, then Syndisphere members should be rivaling each other.

If it isn't defeated to the point it can recover, then Syndisphere members still have crushing to do.

[Eumirbago]

8 minutes ago, Dubayoo said:

The point is that if IQ's defeated to the point it can't recover, then Syndisphere members should be rivaling each other.

If it isn't defeated to the point it can recover, then Syndisphere members still have crushing to do.

You got it fam

[Dubayoo]

1 minute ago, Jay Z said:

You got it fam

Can't tell if you're sarcastic there or not.

If you are, what's missing?

If you're not, it's a shame more people don't.

[Eumirbago]

1 hour ago, Dubayoo said:

Can't tell if you're sarcastic there or not.

If you are, what's missing?

If you're not, it's a shame more people don't.

It is being done. The past 2 years have been Paracovenant, the next 2 will be IQ and clique.

[Buorhann]

Anneal pretty much nailed it.

[japan77]

well, the salt and popcorn was nice, but I'm going to put in my 2 cents. Please note that these are purely my opinions.

First, Dubayoo clearly has issues understanding cost performance. There is a point where blowing up the infra costs you more than it costs them, and at that point, there is no real benefit to blowing it up. They could go off for 20 ish days, comeback and rebuild at dirt cheap levels. As such, it is basically impossible in this game to really kill off an AA from external forces. There's a reason why every AA that died died due to internal forces combined with external pressures, or purely internal forces.

Second, getting Rose to break off from the other side is a fairly old idea on this side, it was pretty apparent that Rose was upset with the dealings that it had to deal with, even without access to the various FA logs. People were calling that switch months before it happened, admittedly, it was generally thought that Rose was gonna treaty BK, not Mensa. So maybe there is some level of an argument to be made that Rose has some special tie-ins, but if so, the white peace move was basically letting Rose do a token showing before it flipped sides, and probably would've been brought over before the war if the war had been delayed. 

Third, Rose has also shown clear improvement in its ability to play this game, everyone should know this by now, but wars come to down to blitzes and counterblitizes, and while Rose used to be a laughing stock, they have shown in this most recent war that they can in fact do some level of a coordinated counterblitz. So Rose in fact got good, and benefited from this move.

Fourth, I'm going to give nods to NPO, BK, and Cerberus for fighting well in the war, their lower tier cohesion was spectacular, and created quite a few headaches. 

Fifth, this is a counter to CM's claim about why people play. Yes, some people play the game differently(Fraggle, Princess BG, Aargh, etc), but the general populous plays to fight and win wars, build their nations into glorious 30 city monstrosities that radiate power by just existing, or some combination of the two. I'm personally more of the former, while someone like LPS is more of the latter, but all in all I like doing a bit of both, as do most people in this game. I look at NPO's 100% taxes and growth regulations, and honestly wonder what they do inbetween wars, which they had issues showing up for(this seems to have been resolved in the most recent war, so congrats to you guys). But, whatever, you play however you want to play, just don't come crying because your activity levels weren't high enough to win you those precious blitzes. If it really mattered, you would shift policies and try and bolster activity and the like in some manner.

Sixth, that CB shit looks really sketchy. Then again, Kastor has a super broad definition for syndisphere, and since KT is apparently part of it, it is possible that someone not truly in syndisphere has access, and as such they are refusing to disclose it to protect the leaker. I'm not buying it, and am going to be completely honest, the sketchy CB looks a whole lot worse than a CB-less attack. The latter has established precidence, and no one really cares about it at this point. The former has created many rifts, and I believe it would be to your benefit to release it in some manner. (Hint: you can blackout usernames)

[Eumirbago]

A simple nou would have been suffice imo

[Dubayoo]

On 6/27/2017 at 10:41 PM, japan77 said:

First, Dubayoo clearly has issues understanding cost performance. There is a point where blowing up the infra costs you more than it costs them, and at that point, there is no real benefit to blowing it up. They could go off for 20 ish days, comeback and rebuild at dirt cheap levels. As such, it is basically impossible in this game to really kill off an AA from external forces. There's a reason why every AA that died died due to internal forces combined with external pressures, or purely internal forces.

Mate, as a pirate, I have to understand cost performance since it influences ransom prices and peace offers.  Gas and ammo spent has to be subtracted from any payment before damage is dealt and added after damage is dealt since it determines how much the aggressor would pay to deal damage.  By making peace, the aggressor saves those resources. 

On top of that, you're ignoring how airstrikes operate with diminished marginal returns.  The reason it's not worth it is because you're going all out against a smaller target.  I say this because even smaller players will airstrike each other for infrastructure damage despite how infrastructure costs less at lower levels while demanding ransom for the airstrikes to stop.

Lastly, you're looking at this in absolute, not comparative, terms.  The question isn't just about whether your gas and ammo spent are greater or lesser than the infrastructure value destroyed, but also how much revenue you're inhibiting by reducing population.  The goal here is to be dominant, not profitable. It's like when two businesses are competing over market share, and one dumps product on the market below cost.  Your goal isn't to make money.  Your goal is to destroy the opponent's ability to do so.

[Felkey]

On 6/27/2017 at 10:41 PM, japan77 said:

well, the salt and popcorn was nice, but I'm going to put in my 2 cents. Please note that these are purely my opinions.

First, Dubayoo clearly has issues understanding cost performance. There is a point where blowing up the infra costs you more than it costs them, and at that point, there is no real benefit to blowing it up. They could go off for 20 ish days, comeback and rebuild at dirt cheap levels. As such, it is basically impossible in this game to really kill off an AA from external forces. There's a reason why every AA that died died due to internal forces combined with external pressures, or purely internal forces.

Second, getting Rose to break off from the other side is a fairly old idea on this side, it was pretty apparent that Rose was upset with the dealings that it had to deal with, even without access to the various FA logs. People were calling that switch months before it happened, admittedly, it was generally thought that Rose was gonna treaty BK, not Mensa. So maybe there is some level of an argument to be made that Rose has some special tie-ins, but if so, the white peace move was basically letting Rose do a token showing before it flipped sides, and probably would've been brought over before the war if the war had been delayed. 

Third, Rose has also shown clear improvement in its ability to play this game, everyone should know this by now, but wars come to down to blitzes and counterblitizes, and while Rose used to be a laughing stock, they have shown in this most recent war that they can in fact do some level of a coordinated counterblitz. So Rose in fact got good, and benefited from this move.

Fourth, I'm going to give nods to NPO, BK, and Cerberus for fighting well in the war, their lower tier cohesion was spectacular, and created quite a few headaches. 

Fifth, this is a counter to CM's claim about why people play. Yes, some people play the game differently(Fraggle, Princess BG, Aargh, etc), but the general populous plays to fight and win wars, build their nations into glorious 30 city monstrosities that radiate power by just existing, or some combination of the two. I'm personally more of the former, while someone like LPS is more of the latter, but all in all I like doing a bit of both, as do most people in this game. I look at NPO's 100% taxes and growth regulations, and honestly wonder what they do inbetween wars, which they had issues showing up for(this seems to have been resolved in the most recent war, so congrats to you guys). But, whatever, you play however you want to play, just don't come crying because your activity levels weren't high enough to win you those precious blitzes. If it really mattered, you would shift policies and try and bolster activity and the like in some manner.

Sixth, that CB shit looks really sketchy. Then again, Kastor has a super broad definition for syndisphere, and since KT is apparently part of it, it is possible that someone not truly in syndisphere has access, and as such they are refusing to disclose it to protect the leaker. I'm not buying it, and am going to be completely honest, the sketchy CB looks a whole lot worse than a CB-less attack. The latter has established precidence, and no one really cares about it at this point. The former has created many rifts, and I believe it would be to your benefit to release it in some manner. (Hint: you can blackout usernames)

I want to point out that I suggested this multiple times, but they refused cause we can supposedly 100% identify them by writing style