69 Days Later

[Keegoz]

1 hour ago, Micchan said:

June 11

KT+ET 154 members

TGH 54 members

August 19

KT+ET 72 members

TGH 37 members

Is losing half of the members and losing a factor?

Remove ET, it is literally a training alliance with an almost open door policy. We don't care if people leave, we care about the ones who stay and do well. If you want to look at it another way, we lost a lot of applicants.

[Buorhann]

6 hours ago, Micchan said:

June 11

KT+ET 154 members

TGH 54 members

August 19

KT+ET 72 members

TGH 37 members

Is losing half of the members and losing a factor?

@Sketchy - What were the final numbers on TKR and TRF again?

[Smith]

In general I think looking at the number of nation's who left an alliance during a war can be a very misleading stat since there are many extenuating circumstances. One of the biggest has already been pointed out. 10 nation's leaving an academy alliance like ET is not really the same as 10 nation's leaving a more mid-upper tier alliance like TCW or TGH.

But since people are already talking about this, then I agree with Keegoz that it is important to look at the type of members that are leaving alliances and where they are going, along with pure numbers. 

People who leave academy alliances like ET and people who leave mass recruiting alliances like TKR during a war are often new nation's who realize the game isn't for them. This is different from an established player leaving an alliance for a new one because they realized they just didn't like their old alliance.

Obviously it is not the case that every single nation that leaves a mass recruiting alliances is a new player, but it makes up the majority that do and happens in every war. These expected losses are built into any competent mass recruiting alliance's econ plans. 

But, if you are going to include the number of new players that leave a mass recruiting alliances during a war then it makes sense to include the new nation's that left an academy alliance as well. 

[Sketchy]

10 hours ago, Micchan said:

-snip-

3 hours ago, Buorhann said:

@Sketchy - What were the final numbers on TKR and TRF again?

This thread is still going? Jesus lmfao

TCW lost 4 people. TKR lost 33 people. TRF lost 13 people.

KT lost 4 people. TGH lost 16 people. ET lost 73 people.

I do find people trying to argue over which members do or don't count rather pointless. Both sides lost mostly lower tier noobs with no real value. 

Anyway carry on cherypicking data and arguing about shit 2 weeks after the war is over lmfao.

[RainbowColor]

2 hours ago, Sketchy said:

.

Edited August 27, 2018 by Color
You do not need to know :)

[Radoje]

On 8/25/2018 at 10:50 PM, Buorhann said:

Is losing members while “winning” a factor?

Both sides went into this war with fresh members that they knew they were going to lose. TKR usually keeps around 20-40 members in it's academy and builds/recruits members at a similar pace to where that number usually stays very similar or almost the same. We started the war with around 181 members if you include VMers, which is our record number by a large margin, or more realistically about 170-175 if you don't include VMers. In that pile, we had maybe 20 nations that were completely fresh off the ship, because the militarization happened as a quick reaction, and no growth on them could realistically happen in the week or two leading up to the war. ET had the exact same problem, they could anticipate the attack but couldn't do anything with their heaps of micros, they just had to roll the dice on whether they'll perform well or jump ship.

War is also a great way to shave fat, and we went into this war expecting to shave a lot of it (both sides). You can agree with me that KT shaved off a lot of unnecessary fat in ET through the war and came out with a lot of fighters they found potential in, some nations in ET did outstanding, I was generally impressed throughout.

All in all, TKR came out with similar/more cities out of the war than we had at the beginning, also while shaving off 30 members that deserted, quit or didn't follow orders, meaning that we're a lot leaner than we were before. 

(The sometimes frequent jumps/drops are applicant shuffling)





 

Edited August 27, 2018 by Radoje

[MonkeyDLegend]

On 8/25/2018 at 10:50 PM, Buorhann said:

Is losing members while “winning” a factor?

 

On 8/26/2018 at 4:20 AM, Rimski said:

You were trained well! You ignore everything around you, everything I say and the only replies you can come up with are "ur salty lolol" 

All I say is thanks for the stats fam.
It is funny to me how your side thought we'd give in early on, while we resisted hard. We had nothing to lose but a lot to destroy and all your attacks would not pay out as you'd just continue taking more damage than dealing when airstriking cheap infra or soldiers which are also cheap. 

What has happened? A coalition that had many advantages over the enemy. The first strike and more nations, a coalition that didn't just come from a war against an another coalition called IQ like the enemy did, a faction just rebuilt was attacked by your side. And let me remind you, all I hear is bragging about the first victories when you pulled the blitz, when our forces were smashed and with a lot of stash on the nation. But when it came to a battle of organized vicious guerrilla warfare, you bragged, about the start of the war.

Many people say that we claim TKR's coalition lost the war, but it is the drama people make up from the topic of "TKR won a pyrrhic victory" with bad strategy that lead to unnecessary losses. I've heard TKR Gov saying that those resource losses were covered up. It doesn't matter if you covered it up or not, you still lost a large ammount of resources. And you did replace them, but you used money in doing so which could be used on something else. What will happen if wars like this continue on? Expenditures on other massive resource losses, what would it take, how many wars like this is needed until you realize that the argument of "we replaced it gg ez lmao" is a bad one to constantly use, that TKR and their allies took a large hit from an inferior force compared to the enemy when it comes to numbers. That even though you had the advantages you couldn't just roll the enemy but to just continue on saying that it is us that prolonged the war for nothing? We just fought when we had the superiority of being able to damage you but you just wanting to have the moral highground by just peforming attacks on targets that would just put you in a minus to say "oh wew so large soldier causalities and wars lost" which means that ammo and gas was wasted on cheap military units, and 'winning a war' which in most cases resulted in many tank/ship losses, and when you obtained that one number on the Wars Won stat you just give us the time to rebuild our force to hit you back again, and again while you do the same mistakes. 

 

4 hours ago, Sketchy said:

This thread is still going? Jesus lmfao

TCW lost 4 people. TKR lost 33 people. TRF lost 13 people.

KT lost 4 people. TGH lost 16 people. ET lost 73 people.

I do find people trying to argue over which members do or don't count rather pointless. Both sides lost mostly lower tier noobs with no real value. 

Anyway carry on cherypicking data and arguing about shit 2 weeks after the war is over lmfao.

What the last quoted one said. We had fun didn't we ? now let's all be friends and enjoy the game

[Theodosius]

7 hours ago, Sketchy said:

This thread is still going? Jesus lmfao

TCW lost 4 people. TKR lost 33 people. TRF lost 13 people.

KT lost 4 people. TGH lost 16 people. ET lost 73 people.

I do find people trying to argue over which members do or don't count rather pointless. Both sides lost mostly lower tier noobs with no real value. 

Anyway carry on cherypicking data and arguing about shit 2 weeks after the war is over lmfao.

I would just like to point out that ET hasn't actually lost that many due to leaving. Around 40 people have been removed from ET during last weeks and immediately post-war for either inactivity or general incompetence. Everyone who wasn't worthy of a promotion was removed, basically. Of course, there were deserters and deletions during the war, and war certainly did help filter out our recruits and has produced some incredible players (great fighters!) who have been promoted to KT for their war efforts, up to 20 of them. I'm really proud of our new generation down there and I'm looking forward to growing their nations.

Complementary meme:

Beginning of the Great Purge, 1936, colourized: Commissar Rimski in action.

Edited August 27, 2018 by Theodosius

[Prefonteen]

33 minutes ago, Theodosius said:

I would just like to point out that ET hasn't actually lost that many due to leaving. Around 40 people have been removed from ET during last weeks and immediately post-war for either inactivity or general incompetence. Everyone who wasn't worthy of a promotion was removed, basically. Of course, there were deserters and deletions during the war, and war certainly did help filter out our recruits and has produced some incredible players (great fighters!) who have been promoted to KT for their war efforts, up to 20 of them. I'm really proud of our new generation down there and I'm looking forward to growing their nations.

Complementary meme:

Beginning of the Great Purge, 1936, colourized: Commissar Rimski in action.

Men. you only kicked them cause they were losing to buorhann and were gonna leave.

[Buorhann]

^ - wot?

[MonkeyDLegend]

 

4 hours ago, Prefonteen said:

Men. you only kicked them cause they were losing to buorhann and were gonna leave. 

 

2 hours ago, Buorhann said:

^ - wot?

wait what ?

[Rimski]

5 hours ago, Theodosius said:

I would just like to point out that ET hasn't actually lost that many due to leaving. Around 40 people have been removed from ET during last weeks and immediately post-war for either inactivity or general incompetence. Everyone who wasn't worthy of a promotion was removed, basically. Of course, there were deserters and deletions during the war, and war certainly did help filter out our recruits and has produced some incredible players (great fighters!) who have been promoted to KT for their war efforts, up to 20 of them. I'm really proud of our new generation down there and I'm looking forward to growing their nations.

Complementary meme:

Beginning of the Great Purge, 1936, colourized: Commissar Rimski in action.

WHY DID YOU STEAL MY MEME

I swear if you were not couped by now you would have been by me

[Squeegee]

On 8/24/2018 at 7:56 AM, Rimski said:

88%

 

Your limited brain capacity hurts me

62%

[Micchan]

So when ET lose members they don't count because they are new players who easy go into inactivity etc., but if they are new players of our side they count

[Hodor]

/contribution

[Sir Scarfalot]

On 8/28/2018 at 1:45 PM, Micchan said:

So when ET lose members they don't count because they are new players who easy go into inactivity etc., but if they are new players of our side they count

You don't have a training alliance, so what objective difference is there between a fully trusted and vetted member of TKR and a 'new player'? I fought a lot of TKR that resorted to tactical deletion, VM, or just fell to inactivity, and that is in spite of you guys "winning". Though, I was fighting the subset of TKR that were actually fighting at all, so they were admittedly the more junior members.

It's understandable for the losing side to drop members... so what's your excuse?

[Micchan]

43 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

You don't have a training alliance, so what objective difference is there between a fully trusted and vetted member of TKR and a 'new player'? I fought a lot of TKR that resorted to tactical deletion, VM, or just fell to inactivity, and that is in spite of you guys "winning". Though, I was fighting the subset of TKR that were actually fighting at all, so they were admittedly the more junior members.

It's understandable for the losing side to drop members... so what's your excuse?

Instead of talking so vaguely can you name those experienced players who deleter or moved to avoid war?

[Buorhann]

I like how we've had Sketchy, Smith, and a few others already settle the discussion of the whole "leaving/deleting" aspect and yet here you are still being butthurt about it, @Micchan.

The ONLY person who said anything related to "trainees" not counting was Keegoz, and yet you're still trying to continue on that point.  No one else said it up till when you brought it up.  (Just FYI, there's a difference between being removed from the alliance and people just leaving or deleting out of it, but that's the last I'll say on the topic)

Edited August 30, 2018 by Buorhann