Jump to content
Leopold von Habsburg

$yndicate Businessweek Update: Cessation of External Venture

Recommended Posts

Church Of Atom would be a welcome addition to WTF Sphere if they don’t think these Protectorates are to their benefit.:P

Although looks like it’s being peaced.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Sir Scarfalot said:

Everyone, don't hate on T$ for this. Sure, their timing was bad, like really bad, but for all that they've actually acted consistently with their FA stance. That's something to encourage, so give them some slack.

They just suicided into Grumpy-Guardian and peaced out after less than 1 full round. According to your coalition on the orders of NPO.

<><> I am confuzzled why you would think this is consistency. Since we haven't seen any logs or statements as to why...at least not that i've seen.

--For the record i actually don't mind//have my own opinions. The consistency part is just strange given there's a 36 page thread above this debating the inconsistency. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Epi said:

They just suicided into Grumpy-Guardian and peaced out after less than 1 full round. According to your coalition on the orders of NPO.

<><> I am confuzzled why you would think this is consistency. Since we haven't seen any logs or statements as to why...at least not that i've seen.

--For the record i actually don't mind//have my own opinions. The consistency part is just strange given there's a 36 page thread above this debating the inconsistency. 

What? who said that?  From my understanding they peaced out because NPO broke the rules of engagement tS set by attacking the overall coalition.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

What? who said that?  From my understanding they peaced out because NPO broke the rules of engagement tS set by attacking the overall coalition.

They didn't state that in the post, that's why i was just debating technicality :p

As for the whole NPO thing, when they initially entered that was the claim, you can search through the early posts from that thread for the actual quotes. But it was just a general condemnation.

Edited by Epi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Epi said:

They didn't state that in the post, that's why i was just debating technicality 😛

As for the whole NPO thing, when they initially entered that was the claim, you can search through the early posts from that thread for the actual quotes. But it was just a general condemnation.

People assumed it was bait in order to justify Pacifica entering the war. The whole phrase "if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, its probably a duck" is what happened. It's a logical assumption. 

Happens all the time like how people assume Chaos and KETOG are going to cuddle next to the fire after this war. Sure, it can look like we are dating but it's more like roll people and chill. 

Either way tS hitting Grumpy was interference into the "greater" war which is what really gets under people's skin. I appreciate them taking a swing and standing by their word as well. Something you don't see much of these day. Hats off to you tS.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Syndicate did take over $14b damage during that time they were fighting, I can see why they wanted to avoid an even further expanded war. Although CoA took $11.7b damage, putting both Syndicate & them in the top 3 most damaged alliances this war.

So I can see why some of them are annoyed they got left hanging after taking such a big hit to help.

Edit: I was looking at net damage I guess. Syndicate took 3rd most damage overall & CoA 6th I guess.

Edited by Noctis Anarch Caelum
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Noctis Anarch Caelum said:

Syndicate did take over $14b damage during that time they were fighting, I can see why they wanted to avoid an even further expanded war. Although CoA took $11.7b damage, putting both Syndicate & them in the top 3 most damaged alliances this war.

So I can see why some of them are annoyed they got left hanging after taking such a big hit to help.

Edit: I was looking at net damage I guess. Syndicate took 3rd most damage overall & CoA 6th I guess.

To be fair, though this isn't to take anything away from Guardian/GOB in the least, and not that there aren't improvements to be made on t$'s part, but the massive early damage was heavily due to a strategy t$ has used many times in which a long war was anticipated, and early on it always goes the same way. The heavily skewed damage is to be expected when a bunch of nations with untouched infra run a ground zero strat against a bunch of larger nations with maxed out tanks and ships. You take your most expensive infra damage in the first round and then after that start closing the gap. How the war would have turned out in the long run, I don't know, but the damage ratios certainly wouldn't have looked as they do now. For a one round war the strategy would have been very different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Flame of the Flawed said:

To be fair, though this isn't to take anything away from Guardian/GOB in the least, and not that there aren't improvements to be made on t$'s part, but the massive early damage was heavily due to a strategy t$ has used many times in which a long war was anticipated, and early on it always goes the same way. The heavily skewed damage is to be expected when a bunch of nations with untouched infra run a ground zero strat against a bunch of larger nations with maxed out tanks and ships. You take your most expensive infra damage in the first round and then after that start closing the gap. How the war would have turned out in the long run, I don't know, but the damage ratios certainly wouldn't have looked as they do now. For a one round war the strategy would have been very different.

I know people are suppose to be nice to you guys, because you leaving helps us out, but you guys got roasted because honestly your activity was pretty terrible.  your blitz was underwelming, I believe guardian/grumpy declared more wars on you guys than you did on us within a few hours.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

I know people are suppose to be nice to you guys, because you leaving helps us out, but you guys got roasted because honestly your activity was pretty terrible.  your blitz was underwelming, I believe guardian/grumpy declared more wars on you guys than you did on us within a few hours.

The blitz was certainly lackluster. As I mentioned before, there are definitely areas for improvement. My point is simply though the the damage ratio is indicative of a strategy that front-loads infra damage at the start of the conflict. Though we could have blitzed better no doubt, the early heavy damage is something t$ has grown accustomed to over the years and was fully expected. When you send zero ships and tanks at 300+ ships and 30k+ tanks, it would be foolish of t$ not to expect that all  your expensive infra is about to get totally rekt.  

P.S. I'm also not saying we would have won in the long run either. I don't know if we would have. This is just in response to the ratio.

23 minutes ago, Sri Lanka 001 said:

Let's not make Alex close this topic alright?

Why would he? I see nothing OOC here.

Edited by Flame of the Flawed
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Flame of the Flawed said:

The blitz was certainly lackluster. As I mentioned before, there are definitely areas for improvement. My point is simply though the the damage ratio is indicative of a strategy that front-loads infra damage at the start of the conflict. Though we could have blitzed better no doubt, the early heavy damage is something t$ has grown accustomed to over the years and was fully expected. When you send zero ships and tanks at 300+ ships and 30k+ tanks, it would be foolish of t$ not to expect that all  your expensive infra is about to get totally rekt.  

P.S. I'm also not saying we would have won in the long run either. I don't know if we would have. This is just in response to the ratio.

Why would he? I see nothing OOC here.

Infra damage is frontloaded alongside the shit talking. Then as all of the fat is trimmed and the submarining takes effect, the shit talking magically vanishes.

So basically Knightfall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bollocks said:

Infra damage is frontloaded alongside the shit talking. Then as all of the fat is trimmed and the submarining takes effect, the shit talking magically vanishes.

So basically Knightfall

Knightfall? was that the war, where I asked you guys in tC for help and you seemed to be... I dont know too inactive to even respond?  I am glad we could help trim some of that excess infra you saved from skipping that war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Flame of the Flawed said:

The blitz was certainly lackluster. As I mentioned before, there are definitely areas for improvement. My point is simply though the the damage ratio is indicative of a strategy that front-loads infra damage at the start of the conflict. Though we could have blitzed better no doubt, the early heavy damage is something t$ has grown accustomed to over the years and was fully expected. When you send zero ships and tanks at 300+ ships and 30k+ tanks, it would be foolish of t$ not to expect that all  your expensive infra is about to get totally rekt.  

P.S. I'm also not saying we would have won in the long run either. I don't know if we would have. This is just in response to the ratio.

Why would he? I see nothing OOC here.

Your mom's lackluster

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Flame of the Flawed said:

The blitz was certainly lackluster. As I mentioned before, there are definitely areas for improvement. My point is simply though the the damage ratio is indicative of a strategy that front-loads infra damage at the start of the conflict. Though we could have blitzed better no doubt, the early heavy damage is something t$ has grown accustomed to over the years and was fully expected. When you send zero ships and tanks at 300+ ships and 30k+ tanks, it would be foolish of t$ not to expect that all  your expensive infra is about to get totally rekt.  

P.S. I'm also not saying we would have won in the long run either. I don't know if we would have. This is just in response to the ratio.

Why would he? I see nothing OOC here.

Personally I think PR wise staying in would have been better, although with it not unlikely this will last longer than Knightfall; think Syndicate decided to cut their losses when they realizing it would still be a lose/lose situation seeing all the anger at NPO for attacking outside the set parameters for Syndicate. (Possible it was already a lose/lose situation when Syndicate imposed the limitation on themselves)

Also Alpha is still fighting, so not like everyone part of that effort even peaced. Not sure House Stark even joined as part of the grumpy/guardian front; although none of your affiliates other than them seem to have been included in the peace decision. Which probably will be harder to recover from PR wise than the damage stats. Would expect damage to be high anyways.

Good luck though, I’ve never disliked you guys even if I thought this was poorly handled. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Noctis Anarch Caelum said:

Personally I think PR wise staying in would have been better, although with it not unlikely this will last longer than Knightfall; think Syndicate decided to cut their losses when they realizing it would still be a lose/lose situation seeing all the anger at NPO for attacking outside the set parameters for Syndicate. (Possible it was already a lose/lose situation when Syndicate imposed the limitation on themselves

I'm retired from gov now a days so I won't get into the handling of the specifics in itself, but I will say I couldn't disagree more on the PR point. Not only would the PR damage have been far worse to have to admit you lied to the entire game, but if we had been willing to do that, and follow through on a bold faced lie, then our PR would deserve to be in the toilet.

As for the timing of pulling out, if that was our logic of when was the best time militarily to withdraw, we either would have never entered or had stayed in the conflict for the long haul. It doesn't make sense from that perspective to declare and give them enough time to do the easy and expensive infra damage, and then leave. But that took on secondary importance compared to the matter of whether we were willing to fail to meet our basic ethical standards.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Flame of the Flawed said:

I'm retired from gov now a days so I won't get into the handling of the specifics in itself, but I will say I couldn't disagree more on the PR point. Not only would the PR damage have been far worse to have to admit you lied to the entire game, but if we had been willing to do that, and follow through on a bold faced lie, then our PR would deserve to be in the toilet.

As for the timing of pulling out, if that was our logic of when was the best time militarily to withdraw, we either would have never entered or had stayed in the conflict for the long haul. It doesn't make sense from that perspective to declare and give them enough time to do the easy and expensive infra damage, and then leave. But that took on secondary importance compared to the matter of whether we were willing to fail to meet our basic ethical standards.

Biggest mistake was pulling out without communication with your affiliates. If opening a front & wanting alliances to join in the effort; should have included all who joined in to help on that front & didn’t expand outside it the chance to be part of the peace rather than leave any behind mainly.

Its good we weren’t among the affiliates to help if you peace without suddenly. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FYI, it wasn't communicated to the community at large, because frankly, you guys dont need to know.  But to avoid having people spread false info about assumptions they are making, CoA and Alpha are out after all current wars expire.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Nizam Adrienne said:

Wrong thread. You folks rock on.

We will, thanks:)

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Knightfall? was that the war, where I asked you guys in tC for help and you seemed to be... I dont know too inactive to even respond?  I am glad we could help trim some of that excess infra you saved from skipping that war.

Lmao, I knew you were gonna bring that up. You were just holding it up there, waiting for your opportunity for release. Anal retention is one of the reasons why I love you and keeps the game going.

Wish I still gave two flying &#33;@#&#036; though. 

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.