Jump to content
Frawley

War Stats: Global War 14

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Frawley said:

Yes it does, it looks at the infra damage every city takes, as well as nation loot, alliance loot etc. 

I'd argue the opposite, given that beiging your opponents is dumb strategically, its much more reflective of the actual winners in wars. 

Edit: But yes, it is more sensitive to initial conditions, eg infra sell offs or prior conflicts reducing infra, both of which have happened in this war. 

I like that you're trying to do something different with victory/defeat conditions, but introducing strategy as a factor is something that's just not feasible. There are plenty of suicide hits, none of these would be considered victory even though they are strategically significant. Similarly, someone who sits on a nation and does minimal damage, they would possibly receive more damage or result in a draw, but you many would consider that a strategic victory.

You can't know intention, so it shouldn't factor into victory conditions in individual wars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Reuben Cheuk said:

For some reason one of my wars isn't being counted: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/war/timeline/war=467294

The KT offshore wasn't registered, it is now.

16 hours ago, Hodor said:

I like that you're trying to do something different with victory/defeat conditions, but introducing strategy as a factor is something that's just not feasible. There are plenty of suicide hits, none of these would be considered victory even though they are strategically significant. Similarly, someone who sits on a nation and does minimal damage, they would possibly receive more damage or result in a draw, but you many would consider that a strategic victory.

You can't know intention, so it shouldn't factor into victory conditions in individual wars.

Its not strategic, its math.  If it costs you more to war than you did, you lost on stats.

Of course it has limitations, NPO doesn't beige as a general rule and the all planes strategy means we lose the stat war early on.  Just the same as being at war previously, or selling off infra improves your 'relative' performance.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Terminal Jest has switched sides, and is now allied with NPO.  Not sure what that will do to the stats page.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Terminal Jest has switched sides, and is now allied with NPO.  Not sure what that will do to the stats page.

Already added.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Frawley said:

Its not strategic, its math.  If it costs you more to war than you did, you lost on stats.

Of course it has limitations, NPO doesn't beige as a general rule and the all planes strategy means we lose the stat war early on.  Just the same as being at war previously, or selling off infra improves your 'relative' performance.

Yea, yea, we agree, I was just saying we shouldn't factor in strategy to these conditions. Maybe I misunderstood your original statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the determination of victory by net damage calculated as a percentage of total damage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if there is a way to make the stats more meaningful, since having more expensive infra to lose isn’t reflective of performance & higher spending if generating more income. Maybe if the value of resources produced constantly throughout counted against net damage like raiding resources; selling down with a negative net income & no resource production wouldn’t be helpful toward stats in the long term. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

House Arryn fighting with The Coal Mines, Vanguard, etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get errors, sorry we could not find etc. when I select this war, not always but like 50% of the times, high traffic?

Share this post


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

Don’t worry @Frawley, I’m sure @Aragorn, son of Arathorn will step up and show us stats.

Shhh it’s ok the other alliances will reach out and do the real negotiations we get it you’re a real tough guy. 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Aragorn, son of Arathorn said:

Shhh it’s ok the other alliances will reach out and do the real negotiations we get it you’re a real tough guy. 

No idea where this came from, but cool.  Less to do on my part then!

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Aragorn, son of Arathorn said:

Shhh it’s ok the other alliances will reach out and do the real negotiations we get it you’re a real tough guy. 

Aren't TGH just an oversized micro at this stage? So I doubt they'll have much to say in their surrender talks as its mostly just major players who do the talking.

Considering the Hippo loves his stats I'm sure they'll love these: 
GPQCfwm.png
58blYDw.png

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Sphinx, you’re the last person to try and talk shit lol, but it’s cute that you’re trying to fit in over there.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

$1,030,451,213,633

$1,013,078,070,061

We are close!

What about a little prize for the player that does the attack to pass Knightfall?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/26/2019 at 7:00 AM, Miller said:

I heard we’re doing a favor for an old friend and keeping this fight going until your military reputation has been restored. Get comfortable boys, this’ll be a while. 

No we actually did restore our military rep. See people thought we had faulted but we've just redoubled our efforts to master the Zapp Brannigan style of throwing wave after wave of our men Infra at the problem until it goes away.

But serious though yes we've got a lot of work to do but tCW has made some great improvements from the disaster of Knightfall, and when I said "Improve our military rep" it was directed more so to allies since I wanted us to be more than just a meatsheild to absorb damage and so far we're on our side 2nd in damage dealt this war, 2nd in offensive wars declared, and our unit kills are spiking. But I don't deny we've got a lot of work ahead of ourselves but at least we don't have 25% of the alliance hiding in VM anymore.  

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So uh, @Frawley, how's TFP going to be listed now that we're in the war again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Quichwe10 said:

So uh, @Frawley, how's TFP going to be listed now that we're in the war again?

Probably the same as TJest with an entry on both sides.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/18/2019 at 7:25 PM, Hodor said:

Is the determination of victory by net damage calculated as a percentage of total damage?

If I remember correctly the percentage is 10%. As an example if the total war damage was $20million you'd get the following:

Draw would be 8-12million net damage each
Victory would need Net damage to be above 12million
Defeat would need Net damage to be under 8million.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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