Popular Post Ripper Posted September 7, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted September 7, 2019 (edited) Greetings scientists all across Orbis! A few hours ago, I read a really interesting scientific paper titled "On the Volatility of Alliances Membership and Stellar Dynamics" written by the University of Afrika Korps IQ. After reading this paper, I realised that problems like members retention or fluctuations in the number of members of an alliance don't follow a complex multi-variable formula as someone would expect (one similar to thermodynamics or the dynamics of closed stellar clusters downgrading to open ones), but instead follow a linear formula. After this great discovery, I decided to use the same approach provided in the paper, but instead of "members retention", I adopted and adapted those complex mathematics to "alliances retention", as this approach can be used for higher levels of abstaction. The results are shown below, in Table 1. Table 1: Status of IQ and IQ-periphery alliances during Global War 14 as of the 7th of September 2019. From this table, it becomes evident that, since the war has lasted for 3 months and IQ/IQ-periphery has lost half of the participating alliances from their side, in another 3 months the whole of IQ/IQ periphery will have surrendered. So, for Chaos Bloc and KETOG, the good news is that IQ/IQ-periphery will surrender in 3 months. The bad news is that, according to the University of Afrika Korps, CoS and Soup will disband by then and will merge in TKR. Still worth it! Edited September 7, 2019 by Ripper 4 20 13 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Pasky Darkfire Posted September 7, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted September 7, 2019 Actual Footage of Ripper and Adrienne congratulating themselves for a job well done. 2019. Colorized. 1 26 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tymeier Posted September 7, 2019 Share Posted September 7, 2019 And the war goes on... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daveth Posted September 7, 2019 Share Posted September 7, 2019 (edited) Less propaganda and more ellies, please. ~Carthago Edited September 7, 2019 by Daveth 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossiya Posted September 7, 2019 Share Posted September 7, 2019 The more one reads these forums, the more IQ points one is surrendering. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasky Darkfire Posted September 7, 2019 Share Posted September 7, 2019 Just now, Rossiya said: The more one reads these forums, the more IQ points one is surrendering. You're in tCW. You've lost all the IQ points you had. 2 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ripper Posted September 7, 2019 Author Share Posted September 7, 2019 Just now, Skae said: Mine was better. More detailed, more numbers, more logic. That's the point of using references. You can skip the baseline work and move forward from there. For science! Anyway, you may have more detail and numbers, but we both have the same amount of "logic". 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldo Posted September 7, 2019 Share Posted September 7, 2019 I'm just here so I don't get fined 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artifex Posted September 7, 2019 Share Posted September 7, 2019 Micros dropping out of a war they weren't prepared for isn't as impactful as a prepared and prominent alliance losing half its member base. Instead of showing this meaningless dribble, how about showing the same member retention stat format but for Coalition B? 1 Quote Love you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ripper Posted September 7, 2019 Author Share Posted September 7, 2019 8 minutes ago, Malleator said: Micros dropping out of a war they weren't prepared for isn't as impactful as a prepared and prominent alliance losing half its member base. Thanks for spotting the mistake in this logic. Since the logic I used though is this of AK, then we could transform your statement to... 10 minutes ago, Malleator said: Members dropping out of a war that they weren't prepared for isn't the same with prepared and prominent members staying behind. ... which is our answer to Skae's post. Assuming that the quality of members remaining in our alliances is the same with the ones that have already left is illogical. Anyway, I had to do it in a round-about way, but it looks like you see the fallacy (and bad math) in Skae's post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Gaius Julius Caesar Posted September 7, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted September 7, 2019 (edited) Rose had 342,676 score back on June 16. They’ve fallen all the way down to 102,476 score on September 7. Zevfer is inactive, and people already know as soon as the next Rose election happens, Zev is gone. Who knows, maybe he’ll take the other half of the bank, since that seems to be the Rose way of leadership departing. Rose’s second in command, Vack, has been inactive as well, and besides changing colour from grey to pink, which they’ve given up on, has done nothing since they embargoed Jordlandia on 7/21. Grumpy Old Bastards had 219,272 score back on June 16. They’ve fallen all the way down to 61,708.60 score on September 7. Felandia has practically quit the game, Seb has quit the war and is just hiding in vacation mode. Such a valued ally in this war, indeed. Church Of Spaceology, which you’re well familiar with Ripper, has gone from 178,288 score on May 24, all the way down to 32,928.65 score on September 7, and is down to 19 members. The Knights Radiant went from 260,532 score back on June 16 down to 121,016.33 score on September 7 under Adrienne’s wonderful leadership. She must have missed the low score they had by the end of Knightfall, and wanted to revisit the good old days. The Knights Templar went from 202,857 score back on June 15 down to 80,044.70 score on September 7. I don’t really have much to say about them besides that. They’ve done well for themselves in the stats though, have to give them props for that, but the score has been devastated. Guardian has gone from 195,810 score back on June 15 down to 52,801.40 score on September 7. Have to wonder, for the oldest alliance in the game, they haven’t yet learned the recent lesson that fighting on the side of TKR doesn’t end well for you. Maybe they’re getting senile in their old age, along with Grumpy. I’m not even going to mention Animation Domination, they lost for both sides, and I hope they have a better future as part of Sanreizan. Ming Empire…. I honestly don’t know what to say about Ming Empire. They went from 131,823 score down to 25,263.81 score, but that doesn’t even begin to address show horrible they are at war in this game. Props to them for honouring their treaty with Rose though, I do have to give them credit for that, but I have to take away the props for the fact that Rose attacked, and so Ming didn’t have to join and get devastated, but they destroyed their alliance anyway. I suppose, props for sticking with your allies, but no props for how stupid your decision was? I don’t know to be honest. I’ll leave Yarr alone, save for thanking them for the stats they helped provide my nation, I appreciate that. Seven Kingdoms went from 158,616 score on May 23 all the way to 42,521.62 score on September 7. You all need to just learn to stay away from TKR, it does you more harm than good to be associated with them. Empyrea is hopefully going to disband at the end of this war, so maybe this war has caused some good to come out of it, but Empyrea never should have formed in the first place, so they don’t get discussed any further. The Golden Horde went from 154,947 score on May 25, all the way down to 45,974.09 score on September 7. Buohann, I don’t know what to say to you to be honest. Maybe take your horde and go somewhere else, and leave that mess behind? Probably for the best in terms of TGH’s long term survival? I dunno. Rose is at 0.299 of its former self just barely less than a third of its former self. Grumpy is 0.28 of its former score, just at just over a fourth of its former score. The Church Of Spaceology is at 0.185 of its former former, less than a fifth of their former score. Even by KERCHTOG’s and Chaos’ standards, that’s pretty damn bad. The Knights Radiant are at 0.46 of their former score, less than half of their former score. Guardian is at 0.27 of their former score, a bit over a fourth of their former score. Ming Empire is at 0.19 of their former score. They’ve nearly faired as poorly as CoS, damn. I don’t know if this should be damning towards Ming for being so bad, or damning towards CoS for having been beaten senseless even worse than Ming was. Seven Kingdoms is 0.268 of their former score, again just over a fourth of their former score. The Golden Horde is 0.297 of their former score, just under a third of their former score. So in summary, yes @Ripper, there have been a number of alliances on your side who have surrendered, but just because an alliance doesn’t formally surrender doesn’t mean it isn’t done for. KERCHTOG and Chaos have been beaten into a bloody pulp. You’ll have to forgive me for not being impressed by these corpses haven’t yet officially surrendered. Edited September 8, 2019 by Tarroc Annoying spacing 15 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevanovia Posted September 7, 2019 Share Posted September 7, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Skae said: Even member like Seb left you to join grumpy, and you call them weak. The same Seb that we recently found out cheated to avoid a bank being hit and is currently hiding in VM mode? Edited September 7, 2019 by Kevanovia 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossiya Posted September 7, 2019 Share Posted September 7, 2019 There has certainly been some sifting going on, separating the good from the bad, both within and across alliances. But it would be an overstatement to say that those members who have left their alliances and those alliances who have left their coalitions had *no* worth. Every departure causes damage, in some cases small, in some cases big. But what's happened has happened... the damage has been done... Orbis will come out lesser from this war. I guess the question is, going forward, do leaders care more about their alliance or about the coalition they are in? Every nation and alliance still standing have proven their worth ... there is no shame in laying down one's arms after a struggle of this magnitude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ripper Posted September 7, 2019 Author Share Posted September 7, 2019 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Skae said: So are you implying that more than 50% of CoS wasn't quality? Do you realize how absurd that is when it was the same CoS who was vital in taking down Grumpy and Guardian in Knightfall? That sure is a way to talk about your own alliance that you are the leader of. Even member like Seb left you to join grumpy, and you call them weak. No idea where you get that 50% number from. I am no leader of CoS. No idea where I said that those members are "weak". Regarding Seb, he did leave CoS (before this war) exactly because he was "weak" and wanted to hide in GOB. And that's the reason he is in VM right now. 9 minutes ago, Skae said: I'm cherishing members and naming their value, while you name them useless. I never called anyone useless... 9 minutes ago, Skae said: Every member is valuable as long as they actively fight. Not only did I count deserters, I counted purple inactives. Those members aren't helping your cause as they sit with no mil and nothing to gain but appartently... you are calling our non-fighting members useless... That's different from the previous quote. I am getting confused here. 9 minutes ago, Skae said: while we have members with mil and a net positive revenue. And we have members with 0 military and same amount of infra. Guess whose revenue is higher. With almost all of your members at sub-1k infra levels, there is not much need to actually fight. Those that want action will fight. The rest will go inactive and log-in every now and then. It's as simple as that. Edited September 7, 2019 by Ripper 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ripper Posted September 7, 2019 Author Share Posted September 7, 2019 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Tarroc said: Score stats So in summary, yes @Ripper, there have been a number of alliances on your side who have surrendered, but just because an alliance doesn’t formally surrender doesn’t mean it isn’t done for. KERCHTOG and Chaos have been beaten into a bloody pulp. You’ll have to forgive me for not being impressed by these corpses haven’t yet officially surrendered. Not sure what score changes prove. If you are implying that below a specific score (change) an alliance has lost/surrendered by default... well, that's kinda strange. 15 minutes ago, Tarroc said: Rose is at 0.299% ... and more stats I think you mean 29.9% or something like this. Unless you have something different in mind. 14 minutes ago, Tarroc said: Guardian has gone from 195,810 score back on June 15 down to 52,801.40 score on September 7. Have to wonder, for the oldest alliance in the game, they haven’t yet learned the recent lesson that fighting on the side of TKR doesn’t end well for you. Maybe they’re getting senile in their old age, along with Grumpy. It looks like Guardian is in a tough spot. They fought at the side of TKR in Knightfall. Fought against TKR 3 months ago... Have to fight alongside with TKR now... It's strange, isn't it? 17 minutes ago, Tarroc said: Felandia has practically quit the game, Seb has quit the war and is just hiding in vacation mode. Such a valued ally in this war, indeed. It's exactly that type of people that made me want to fight GOB in Knightfall, so I am neither surprised nor sad they've left. Quite the opposite. Edited September 7, 2019 by Ripper 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Limbuwan Posted September 7, 2019 Share Posted September 7, 2019 *Insert Ripper Comics Here* 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zei-Sakura Alsainn Posted September 7, 2019 Share Posted September 7, 2019 "Don't if Yakuza has surrendered yet..." Don't matter, they're basically dead. Yakuza was a nothing that did nothing and could do nothing before EM, now with him, his money, and half the alliances actual members who werent people there to be part of EM's city program, it will return to the reigns of the guy who made it nothing, all while being crippled from the war and accompanying exodus. Rest in Pepperonis, Yakuza. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Julius Caesar Posted September 7, 2019 Share Posted September 7, 2019 6 minutes ago, Ripper said: Not sure what score changes prove. If you are implying that below a specific score (change) an alliance has lost/surrendered by default... well, that's kinda strange. I think you mean 29.9% or something like this. Unless you have something different in mind. It looks like Guardian is in a tough spot. They fought at the side of TKR in Knightfall. Fought against TKR 3 months ago... Have to fight alongside with TKR now... It's strange, isn't it? It's exactly that type of people that made me want to fight GOB in Knightfall, so I am neither surprised nor sad they've left. Quite the opposite. I'm not implying a certain score loss causes an alliance to surrender. What I am implying though, is that an alliance's score is made out of member scores, and member scores are made out of things such as infa, cities, military, and projects. Due to the fact that cities can not be destroyed, unless Alex wants to change that in the future, and only the project's owner can delete the project, the decreasing score points to a decreasing amount of military, which is indicative of an alliance's ability to fight, and a decreasing amount of infa, which is how the cities of the nation function, and the nation generally needs the cities to function in order for the nation to function, and when a number of nations are unable to function, that leads to the alliance having a growing percentage of its membership unable to participate in the war, and that is generally what causes an alliance to surrender.. 0.29 and 29% are pretty much the same thing. They both operate under the pretense of trying to reach a whole. For 29% the whole is 100% and for 0.29% the whole is 1.0. Guardian should just stay out of the wars, they've been getting pretty battered, but I'll leave that decision to Memph and Venek, and as for the GoB situation, I have to agree with you. Grumpy is an alliance of cowards and war dodgers, trying to hide with their high nation scores, out of anyone's war range. Makes it all the more satisfying to drag them down and beat them senseless. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ripper Posted September 7, 2019 Author Share Posted September 7, 2019 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Tarroc said: I'm not implying a certain score loss causes an alliance to surrender. What I am implying though, is that an alliance's score is made out of member scores, and member scores are made out of things such as infa, cities, military, and projects. Due to the fact that cities can not be destroyed, unless Alex wants to change that in the future, and only the project's owner can delete the project, the decreasing score points to a decreasing amount of military, which is indicative of an alliance's ability to fight, and a decreasing amount of infa, which is how the cities of the nation function, and the nation generally needs the cities to function in order for the nation to function, and when a number of nations are unable to function, that leads to the alliance having a growing percentage of its membership unable to participate in the war, and that is generally what causes an alliance to surrender. Our side is at sub 1k infra-level. Your side is at sub 1k infra-level. We have no military. You have military expenses. One could state that we actually make more money than you. I mean, you are free to keep 40k tanks, 3k aircraft and 400 ships, while having 700 infra. I will just keep the same amount of infra with zero military expenses. Not sure why me having no military would make me the loser of this state. xD 12 minutes ago, Tarroc said: 0.29 and 29% are pretty much the same thing. They both operate under the pretense of trying to reach a whole. For 29% the whole is 100% and for 0.29% the whole is 1.0. Well... no. For 29% ( % = per cent = out of 100) the whole is indeed 100% (100 out of 100 = 100/100). For 0.29 (relative number), you can expect the whole to be 1.0. No % symbol used. For 0.29% (0.29 out of 100), the whole is yet again 100%. So, 0.29% actually translates to 0.29/100 = 0.0029 out of 1.0. 12 minutes ago, Tarroc said: Grumpy is an alliance of cowards and war dodgers, trying to hide with their high nation scores, out of anyone's war range. Makes it all the more satisfying to drag them down and beat them senseless. I feel you. Been there. Done that. P.S. Speaking of money... Your cities are out of power... Ask for some uranium from BK. Edited September 7, 2019 by Ripper 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossiya Posted September 7, 2019 Share Posted September 7, 2019 8 minutes ago, Tarroc said: 0.29 and 29% are pretty much the same thing. They both operate under the pretense of trying to reach a whole. For 29% the whole is 100% and for 0.29% the whole is 1.0. Please delete this fast. 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ripper Posted September 7, 2019 Author Share Posted September 7, 2019 1 minute ago, Rossiya said: Please delete this fast. Can I keep a screenshot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasky Darkfire Posted September 7, 2019 Share Posted September 7, 2019 11 minutes ago, Tarroc said: 0.29 and 29% are pretty much the same thing. They both operate under the pretense of trying to reach a whole. For 29% the whole is 100% and for 0.29% the whole is 1.0. Leave the math to the professionals, sport. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zei-Sakura Alsainn Posted September 7, 2019 Share Posted September 7, 2019 @Ripper i compared myself up with a c20 NPO a while ago and found that me at 400 infra with only soldiers and a few ships made more money than they did at 800 with max planes and soldiers, and that was before raiding. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ripper Posted September 7, 2019 Author Share Posted September 7, 2019 8 minutes ago, Akuryo said: @Ripper i compared myself up with a c20 NPO a while ago and found that me at 400 infra with only soldiers and a few ships made more money than they did at 800 with max planes and soldiers, and that was before raiding. What do you mean more? 29% more? 0.29% more? It's not the same. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted September 7, 2019 Share Posted September 7, 2019 Who is @Tarroc? 1 1 Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.