Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Placentica

Paperless Treaty Web - Upper Tier Alliances

Recommended Posts

I will give you plenty of warning when I come ronnie. Since this game isn't designed to have fair wars.....why do we need a cap on offensive wars? Remove the cap. Speaking of losers.....I have a few badges that tell me I'm first at quite a few things. What badges do you have? Just the ones you bought? I guess I win and you are the guy playing like a loser. Go try knitting

 

Last war I was involved in I did 3.5 billion in damages personally. What did you do? We can check. Keep my name out of your mouth if you cant keep up

Edited by Apeman
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Apeman said:

I will give you plenty of warning when I come ronnie. Since this game isn't designed to have fair wars.....why do we need a cap on offensive wars? Remove the cap. Speaking of losers.....I have a few badges that tell me I'm first at quite a few things. What badges do you have? Just the ones you bought? I guess I win and you are the guy playing like a loser. Go try knitting

 

Last war I was involved in I did 3.5 billion in damages personally. What did you do? We can check. Keep my name out of your mouth if you cant keep up

You can do monetary damage all you want, Ape. You know I have you beat in bruised egos caused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Apeman said:

I will give you plenty of warning when I come ronnie. Since this game isn't designed to have fair wars.....why do we need a cap on offensive wars? Remove the cap. Speaking of losers.....I have a few badges that tell me I'm first at quite a few things. What badges do you have? Just the ones you bought? I guess I win and you are the guy playing like a loser. Go try knitting

 

Last war I was involved in I did 3.5 billion in damages personally. What did you do? We can check. Keep my name out of your mouth if you cant keep up

First nation to 10k.... not bad!

Most nukes launched.... meh

Come on Ape thats only 1 good award, I mean that isn't really that good. although to be fair if they ever launch an award for most wars lost you definitely are one of the top contenders. Just be sure to hit me up when you plan on hitting Ronny so I can set up the bet pool.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/22/2018 at 9:07 AM, Sephiroth said:

First nation to 10k.... not bad!

Most nukes launched.... meh

Come on Ape thats only 1 good award, I mean that isn't really that good. although to be fair if they ever launch an award for most wars lost you definitely are one of the top contenders. Just be sure to hit me up when you plan on hitting Ronny so I can set up the bet pool.

Wow, sour grapes much? Just because you're not at all likely to ever beat him in nukes launched doesn't make his accomplishments any less solid.

As for wars lost...

https://politicsandwar.com/leaderboards/warslost

Apeman isn't even in the top 10, though at 50 he is admittedly close to overtaking TheShadow and getting on that leaderboard.

...Actually, if anything, the top of that board is so low that it really is anyone's race, even I might get there at some point lmao

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/15/2018 at 6:18 PM, Sir Scarfalot said:

KT vs ET independence war. Nuff said. Which would of course mean that TEst would have to declare war on themselves, resulting in their paperless ties to EMC being activated and therefore TKR would have to declare war on TEst... and themselves. Which means the IQ deep state has to activate and declare war on EMC and therefore itself, and then we're all in Rose again.

dominoes-falling-260nw-157176650.jpg

#Etexit

You cracked the mystery behind Rose ;). Might as well ask Alex to move everyone in the game back into Rose again

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/22/2018 at 3:12 PM, Apeman said:

Last war I was involved in I did 3.5 billion in damages personally. What did you do? We can check. Keep my name out of your mouth if you cant keep up

Mate, the first time you mentioned this number here on the forum, Dr. Rush told you as a personal message from Sheepy that this number is dead wrong because you used the ingame calculator which is hopelessly bugged. 😛

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Mitsuru said:

Mate, the first time you mentioned this number here on the forum, Dr. Rush told you as a personal message from Sheepy that this number is dead wrong because you used the ingame calculator which is hopelessly bugged. 😛

Lmfao 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well when stacked against the ingame infra calculator based on beginning infra vs what was lost the number is very identical. Agreed I wasn't using it for things like aluminum used because it may be flawed, the damage done and recieved seemed constant. Test the calculator out to the parameters described and see for yourself. Track a raid. Figure out the infra lost per strike and you will see your arguement and the laughter of your voiceless hyena will be silenced. 

What next let me guess the infra calculator is broken also? Maybe it's just your arguement that needs to be fixed. Facts are facts and lies look more like a you problem than my facts. Add salt here come on I know you wanna.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Apeman said:

Well when stacked against the ingame infra calculator based on beginning infra vs what was lost the number is very identical. Agreed I wasn't using it for things like aluminum used because it may be flawed, the damage done and recieved seemed constant. Test the calculator out to the parameters described and see for yourself. Track a raid. Figure out the infra lost per strike and you will see your arguement and the laughter of your voiceless hyena will be silenced. 

What next let me guess the infra calculator is broken also? Maybe it's just your arguement that needs to be fixed. Facts are facts and lies look more like a you problem than my facts. Add salt here come on I know you wanna.

 

 

I've had it say 100 infra was worth like $6 quite a few times.  It's shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess I need to update this.

Can some of the upper tier heavy alliances grow a pair and actually let me know how many more paperless treaties they have?

It's not like we aren't going to have a year's worth of stagnation with a few hits on random micros to convince everyone you aren't the reason the game is dying.

Edited by Placentica
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So......why do we  need to have another treaty web?  If alliances are paperless.....deal with it.....take a chance and hit them.  You'll find out quick enough who they are "Treatied" with when you get countered.  One of the points of being paperless is to keep things interesting and surprising.  Quit trying to ruin it by trying to order everyone to fess up to their behind the scences secret treaties.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/31/2018 at 7:04 PM, Sailor Jerry said:

So......why do we  need to have another treaty web?  If alliances are paperless.....deal with it.....take a chance and hit them.  You'll find out quick enough who they are "Treatied" with when you get countered.  One of the points of being paperless is to keep things interesting and surprising.  Quit trying to ruin it by trying to order everyone to fess up to their behind the scences secret treaties.

It does the opposite.  It makes the game stagnate.  The Coalition is a perfect example.  Plus I'd argue that "paperless" is just a moniker for spin.  The operative description here is hidden. You keep them hidden so people think you aren't the problem for the stagnation like they leveled at IQ's public treaties.  But if all paperless were in the open you'd see a mess of lines that's far more entangled than IQ.  This isn't directed at TEst necessarily and certainly not historically.

The game might get interesting again if the upper tiers actually want to stop being such pixel huggers and fight each other.  And no, I'm not talking about the faux-wars where you can claim you fought, but really you so selectively picked your target that you even had to hit people you were friendly with because that was the path of least resistance and you couldn't be bothered to actually play some politics or take risks.  And these same alliances made sure there would be no counters.

No one in the upper tier has any ambition and there seems to be no political fallout from pixel hugging. So it continues and is even considered a "successful" approach.  Yes, and it's so admirable to not use the forums so the game can stagnate even further while an alliance hides behind secret treaties, rarely fighting, while not dispelling the notion that your only skill as an alliance is to play it safe and only wage wars against much much smaller opponents that are already irrelevant and won't actually change the landscape of the game.

The game's mechanics and economy are set for large-scale wars every few months. If you give it a year, let alone what's it's currently at, you might as well not even bother with the war part of the game.  The lack of any real war in the upper tier has now broken a vital part to a war simulator; the ability to suppress real opponents (I'm not talking about irrelevant alliances that are curbstomped randomly).  Incomes and savings are just too crazy now.

Even if we do have a big war, you can no doubt guess the main upper tier players will not attack each other. If they get involved, and they will try to get involved so people don't catch on to the fact they never fight real wars, they will pick on lighter targets, without bigger allies or very connected that don't matter and won't really change the landscape.  They won't attack alliances that are in any way risky.  And we will all reap the benefits of what's become an upper tier snooze-fest.

The game was never intended to have people with 30+ cities.  It was intended to be easy to rebuild, easy to fight, lots of numerous wars, and an economy that was kept in check by war.  When you removed that people were allowed to break the game.

Now the biggest drama is people having their tens of billions stolen because they are so overflowing with cash they have turned a war simulator into a banking simulator.

Think about that for a second.  Politics and Banking.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Placentica said:

It does the opposite.  It makes the game stagnate.  The Coalition is a perfect example.  Plus I'd argue that "paperless" is just a moniker for spin.  The operative description here is hidden. You keep them hidden so people think you aren't the problem for the stagnation like they leveled at IQ's public treaties.  But if all paperless were in the open you'd see a mess of lines that's far more entangled than IQ.  This isn't directed at TEst necessarily and certainly not historically.

The game might get interesting again if the upper tiers actually want to stop being such pixel huggers and fight each other.  And no, I'm not talking about the faux-wars where you can claim you fought, but really you so selectively picked your target that you even had to hit people you were friendly with because that was the path of least resistance and you couldn't be bothered to actually play some politics or take risks.  And these same alliances made sure there would be no counters.

No one in the upper tier has any ambition and there seems to be no political fallout from pixel hugging. So it continues and is even considered a "successful" approach.  Yes, and it's so admirable to not use the forums so the game can stagnate even further while an alliance hides behind secret treaties, rarely fighting, while not dispelling the notion that your only skill as an alliance is to play it safe and only wage wars against much much smaller opponents that are already irrelevant and won't actually change the landscape of the game.

The game's mechanics and economy are set for large-scale wars every few months. If you give it a year, let alone what's it's currently at, you might as well not even bother with the war part of the game.  The lack of any real war in the upper tier has now broken a vital part to a war simulator; the ability to suppress real opponents (I'm not talking about irrelevant alliances that are curbstomped randomly).  Incomes and savings are just too crazy now.

Even if we do have a big war, you can no doubt guess the main upper tier players will not attack each other. If they get involved, and they will try to get involved so people don't catch on to the fact they never fight real wars, they will pick on lighter targets, without bigger allies or very connected that don't matter and won't really change the landscape.  They won't attack alliances that are in any way risky.  And we will all reap the benefits of what's become an upper tier snooze-fest.

The game was never intended to have people with 30+ cities.  It was intended to be easy to rebuild, easy to fight, lots of numerous wars, and an economy that was kept in check by war.  When you removed that people were allowed to break the game.

Now the biggest drama is people having their tens of billions stolen because they are so overflowing with cash they have turned a war simulator into a banking simulator.

Think about that for a second.  Politics and Banking.

 

Hi Placentica. Long time!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

for the record, rebuilding 30 cities is actually easier than rebuilding 15 cities.

If you lose equal infrastructure per city, it should be the same and not easier. 30 city nation will have age bonus, so that will make rebuilding slightly faster. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/31/2018 at 8:04 PM, Sailor Jerry said:

So......why do we  need to have another treaty web?  If alliances are paperless.....deal with it.....take a chance and hit them.  You'll find out quick enough who they are "Treatied" with when you get countered.  One of the points of being paperless is to keep things interesting and surprising.  Quit trying to ruin it by trying to order everyone to fess up to their behind the scences secret treaties.

Paperless treaties and secret treaties aren't synonymous.  Secret treaties are necessarily paperless, but paperless relationships as they were originally conceived were meant to be well-publicized.  The point was to promote ongoing cooperation and trust over legalism, not hide relationships in the hopes of gaining a strategic advantage.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Oppilan said:

If you lose equal infrastructure per city, it should be the same and not easier. 30 city nation will have age bonus, so that will make rebuilding slightly faster. 

You are right, its not like I have any experience with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/2/2018 at 11:15 AM, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

for the record, rebuilding 30 cities is actually easier than rebuilding 15 cities.

And rebuilding even 1 billion cities is also super easy if you are given 1+ year of avoid any real fights.

But I'm not talking about rebuilding, I'm talking about building. Huge difference.

Edited by Placentica

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

You are right, its not like I have any experience with that.

You’ve not really fought in any wars so how would you have this experience?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Placentica said:

And rebuilding even 1 billion cities is also super easy if you are given 1+ year of avoid any real fights.

But I'm not talking about rebuilding, I'm talking about building. Huge difference.

That's fair, going to vacation mode for a year also must make it hard to rebuild as well.  And we were talking about rebuilding

 

5 hours ago, FilipS said:

You’ve not really fought in any wars so how would you have this experience?

I'm confused, I didn't know who you were, so I looked you up your nation, and I noticed you have MDP's with two alliances that just got out of a war, and I don't remember seeing your alliance as a participant.  Glass houses friend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

I'm confused, I didn't know who you were, so I looked you up your nation, and I noticed you have MDP's with two alliances that just got out of a war, and I don't remember seeing your alliance as a participant.  Glass houses friend.

They signed us after the war. Don't spout falsehoods if you aren't informed.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

I'm confused, I didn't know who you were, so I looked you up your nation, and I noticed you have MDP's with two alliances that just got out of a war, and I don't remember seeing your alliance as a participant.  Glass houses friend.

 

30 minutes ago, Sketchy said:

They signed us after the war. Don't spout falsehoods if you aren't informed.

Not to mention Empyrea fought CKD and HS about a month and a half ago, so even if they didn't fight alongside their current allies it's not as if they're strangers to fighting. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.