Jump to content

Don't Go Breaking My Heart (DoW)


Nacho
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Lord Vader said:

So we're bad...
...Because our members are good?

Again this is the same garbage retort from duckhunt.   Except it’s even funnier now because of the people you formed your bloc with and their previous public statements on things.   
 

I expected better from someone ‘taken under Tyrion’s wing’ who then left what, barely 2 months later?   

  • Downvote 1

:nyan:The Volleyball :nyan: 

Avanti Immortali

 

..one, two, Jimmy's coming for you...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dr James Wilson said:

Again this is the same garbage retort from duckhunt.   Except it’s even funnier now because of the people you formed your bloc with and their previous public statements on things.   
 

I expected better from someone ‘taken under Tyrion’s wing’ who then left what, barely 2 months later?   

I left at Tyrion's encouragement, tyvm.

Peace In Our Time
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Lord Tyrion said:

To state this once - there was no treaty with Rose.  We entered because we feel it is in our best interest and security to join.  We have been working towards multispheres for a very long time in TI/TFP.  We left Swamp to downsize, we spun off Delta to downsize, we spun off Mystery Inc to downsize - and led to the creation of a game with many more blocs, which adds more dynamic and fun gameplay.  The moves were all made towards a future of multispheres and most of the game seemed on board with that and following suit.  We've invested a lot of time and effort into getting to this point.  The creation of a sphere that has 6 of the top 12 alliances (50%), including the largest and strongest alliances, is a direct contradiction to what we've been working to accomplish.  HM just finished wiping Delta, TKR just got done wiping Swamp - and they together are now wanting to wipe Rose.  We're not going to wait and hope they don't decide we're next.  We are standing up to what we believe the game needs to be.  Those that want to point at Oasis numbers/members are being disingenuous, as half of our members are sub C12.  This sphere of 50% of the game's top alliances is appalling and was completely unnecessary.  

Thank you, no longer have to guess as to why you guys entered this war 🙂

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Lord Tyrion said:

To state this once - there was no treaty with Rose.  We entered because we feel it is in our best interest and security to join.  We have been working towards multispheres for a very long time in TI/TFP.  We left Swamp to downsize, we spun off Delta to downsize, we spun off Mystery Inc to downsize - and led to the creation of a game with many more blocs, which adds more dynamic and fun gameplay.  The moves were all made towards a future of multispheres and most of the game seemed on board with that and following suit.  We've invested a lot of time and effort into getting to this point.  The creation of a sphere that has 6 of the top 12 alliances (50%), including the largest and strongest alliances, is a direct contradiction to what we've been working to accomplish.  HM just finished wiping Delta, TKR just got done wiping Swamp - and they together are now wanting to wipe Rose.  We're not going to wait and hope they don't decide we're next.  We are standing up to what we believe the game needs to be.  Those that want to point at Oasis numbers/members are being disingenuous, as half of our members are sub C12.  This sphere of 50% of the game's top alliances is appalling and was completely unnecessary.  

Oddly familiar for some reason. I just can't fathom why..

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Untitled.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Mayor said:

They are a training bloc, that factored into my rating of "only good in dogpiles". It would be dogshit if any other sphere, tbh Rose can do better with their secret treaties.

 

The technical term is "buffers", alliances that serve no other purpose than to absorb as many hits as possible so the main alliance can recover. Often known as meatshields.

And yes, I agree. Rose is surrounded by garbage, they're actually very competent, and I'm fairly confident DtC and maybe 1 or 2 other Rose members is running their sphere's entire milcom coordination efforts, because none of the other alliances have people semi-competent to help out.

Based on numbers alone Rose's sphere would turn into a laughing stock if they don't win this somewhat comfortably, but based but I've been playing this shitty game for too long, not to be surprised if that doesn't happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Mayor said:

They are a training bloc, that factored into my rating of "only good in dogpiles". It would be dogshit if any other sphere, tbh Rose can do better with their secret treaties.

You seem really upset!    Salty even!

 

tastes delicious on my freedom fries.  

33 minutes ago, Lord Vader said:

Alcyr, i'm glad you're still around, haven't talked in a while.
But... Again... Not really how I see it. TI/TFP "downsizing" after swamp lead to the creation of Oasis, which, again... (admittedly by your own gov) became the biggest sphere. Do I sense hypocricy?

Biggest numbers argument again and anyone that doesn’t like us uses those numbers to trash our nation quality. You’ve done that yourself quite a few times.  So which is it.   Are we a mass collection of shit nations that doesn’t matter or a monster bloc with a ton of nations and the true evil Group.
 

 

you can’t have your cake and eat it too.  

  • Haha 1

:nyan:The Volleyball :nyan: 

Avanti Immortali

 

..one, two, Jimmy's coming for you...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Dr James Wilson said:

You seem really upset!    Salty even!

 

tastes delicious on my freedom fries.  

Salty?! Who dare say such a thing! This war finally has some stakes now so thanks for that! I just love the blatant hypocrisy from Orbis previous largest sphere and supreme defender of minispheres Oasis to then protect Rose, the largest alliance in the game and competent military power. This is just really funny to me and I love a good laugh. But really thanks, my favorite war to date was Papers Please, so I am used to dogpiles from big spheres like yours + Rose; not to mention being in Arrgh for years so enjoy those freedom fries! Salted from genuine Oasis hypocrites of only the highest quality!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alcyr said:

Well so far TI/TFP have shown more willingness to downsize, both by leaving Swamp after Duck Hunt and downsizing Oasis when TKR/t$ split after Quack's Last Ride. Meanwhile, TKR's downsizing was immediately followed by forming a sphere with another bloc to become the biggest again. Plus, those numbers don't help now.

Note that they downsized to the same size as Blackwater, aka the non TKR bits of quack. 

Note that after they broke from Swamp after duck hunt, their whole spiel about remaining small rapidly ballooned to the size, and then beyond the size, they left to begin with.

 

Maybe you'd have to show less willingness to downsize if you, just, I don't know, didn't bloat to begin with? Just say no, you don't have to sign every misfit and micro in the world but you're the only group that's consistently done that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Cooper_ said:

Hey folks, back at it again with the unsolicited WoT.  Sit back, read, and enjoy a cup of tea!

I think there's a few issues with the Oasis entry into this war.  The foremost of which is the mention of secret treaties.  To enter a bit of context, a primary reason for TKR's entry against Rose was actions that were done last war in the form of secret treaties that imbalanced a global war.  These were secret treaties they maintained with Oasis and HM.  Notably, Rose entered on those secret treaties while the other blocs were hit.  Nonetheless, a secret treaty existed, which you can confirm here:

From an objective perspective, it is suspicious that a previous secret treaty combination is repeating.  Our stance on secret treaties is clear.  They're destructive for the meta.  Oasis is claiming that they entered based on HM's handling of Delta and dissatisfaction with the formation of Hollywood.  For the sake of good faith, let's entertain these claims even if they may seem spurious.

Even if there wasn't a secret treaty, any form of "friendship" or "agreement" if made without paper on the web is an effective secret treaty.  The difference is semantics.  Orbis norms have long been that coalition agreements can only be of offensive nature as the oA has always been seen as a universal for all alliances, but defensive pacts are not allowed.  This was showcased in Knightfall where TKR suffered heavily for secret treaties that weren't activated--not to mention changing the course of a global war by the same who used secret treaties later on to hit us in Duck Hunt.  We made mistakes in the past.  There's no doubt.  Because of this, we've wholly transitioned our stance to transparency even when if it comes at political costs.  Our friends in Oasis and Rose have not returned the favor.

Next, folks like @Dr James Wilson talk about the size of Hollywood.  First, the statistics they're showing are score, and not tiering charts.  Let's rectify that with a chart that shows all top 50 alliances (I made this on mobile, so sorry about not doing smaller alliances as it was quite painful already to make) and members that have been active within 2 weeks:

tiering.PNG.8e681e8167355c113ccde8f9e7e0188d.PNG

Hollywood isn't the biggest sphere by a wide margin in terms of total cities nor nations.  The tiering of Hollywood is relatively even throughout with a slight advantage in the upper tiers, but largely comparable to both Rose and Syndispheres. 

 

 

Based on your own numbers, Hollywood outmatches Rose in every tier but the 31-34 category. And they have almost twice as many in the 35+ range. Even adding Oasis, you guys still heavily outnumber them in the 35+ range, but the tide turns the other way for most if not all of the other tiers. I think another serious issue is the lack of CB for attacking Rose. Like the Leaky Faucet Global War start, strong Spheres giving flimsy or non existent CBs tends to put other Spheres on edge, and for good reason. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Cooper_ said:

Hey folks, back at it again with the unsolicited WoT.  Sit back, read, and enjoy a cup of tea!

I think there's a few issues with the Oasis entry into this war.  The foremost of which is the mention of secret treaties.  To enter a bit of context, a primary reason for TKR's entry against Rose was actions that were done last war in the form of secret treaties that imbalanced a global war.  These were secret treaties they maintained with Oasis and HM.  Notably, Rose entered on those secret treaties while the other blocs were hit.  Nonetheless, a secret treaty existed, which you can confirm here:

From an objective perspective, it is suspicious that a previous secret treaty combination is repeating.  Our stance on secret treaties is clear.  They're destructive for the meta.  Oasis is claiming that they entered based on HM's handling of Delta and dissatisfaction with the formation of Hollywood.  For the sake of good faith, let's entertain these claims even if they may seem spurious.

Even if there wasn't a secret treaty, any form of "friendship" or "agreement" if made without paper on the web is an effective secret treaty.  The difference is semantics.  Orbis norms have long been that coalition agreements can only be of offensive nature as the oA has always been seen as a universal for all alliances, but defensive pacts are not allowed.  This was showcased in Knightfall where TKR suffered heavily for secret treaties that either weren't activated or well-known--not to mention changing the course of a global war by the same who used secret treaties later on to hit us in Duck Hunt.  We made mistakes in the past.  There's no doubt.  Because of this, we've wholly transitioned our stance to transparency even when if it comes at political costs.  Our friends in Oasis and Rose have not returned the favor.

Next, folks like @Dr James Wilson talk about the size of Hollywood.  First, the statistics they're showing are score, and not tiering charts.  Let's rectify that with a chart that shows all top 50 alliances (I made this on mobile, so sorry about not doing smaller alliances as it was quite painful already to make) and members that have been active within 2 weeks:

tiering.PNG.8e681e8167355c113ccde8f9e7e0188d.PNG

Hollywood isn't the biggest sphere by a wide margin in terms of total cities nor nations.  The tiering of Hollywood is relatively even throughout with a slight advantage in the upper tiers, but largely comparable to both Rose and Syndispheres.  At the same time, Syndisphere has a large advantage in other tiers and Rose is quite competitive despite being the smallest sphere.  In terms of total city count, Hollywood vs. Rose was about 1.3:1.  This was the closest war in more than 3 years, and nowhere near a dogpile.  After Oasis' entry, this became a 1.6:1 in favor of Rose and Oasis.  Ironically, Oasis' entry made more of an imbalance in both tiering and city counts than the war beforehand.  Moving forward, let's only address using the relevant statistic: tiering.  Score is useless, and y'all know this.

Oasis has also presented claims about Delta's supposed mistreatment at the hands of HM.  From my understanding, the outcome of aggressive actions on behalf of Delta was them escaping without reps.  I don't love terms, but this seems like a slap on the wrist from a sphere that y'all clearly state has done and seen much worse.  Further, if you had an issue with HM and wanted to use it as a CB, then you could consider declaring your own war when there isn't another one going on.  The meta hasn't ever accepted interference in wars, so this is an extremely weak CB and borderline meta-breaking if you try to take this tack.

The sphere size argument is moot with any reasonable observations about the current sphere sizes.  The alternative argument for Delta treatment means that Oasis was planning to interfere in another war, amounting to at best a destruction of long-held Orbis norms.  Thus, even if we dubiously accept there were no secret treaties, we're not left with much but an invalid CB.  Simply put, this just continues Oasis' track record of secret treaties and wars stacked in their favor.  It's disappointing.

Alas, the die is cast and now we fight.  Y'all have the advantage, but my members want the pixels.  Let's see who wins.

 

Basically it is perfectly fine for you guys to selectively pick targets and ensure you outnumber them in your wars, But the second the tables have turned it becomes a terrible dogpile? 

Now aside from all that, In what world would an alliance sit idle while another bigger alliance is going around murdering everyone else? It is clearly in our best interest to stop you in your tracks before it becomes our turn to be attacked.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Phoenyx said:

Based on your own numbers, Hollywood outmatches Rose in every tier but the 31-34 category. And they have almost twice as many in the 35+ range. Even adding Oasis, you guys still heavily outnumber them in the 35+ range, but the tide turns the other way for most if not all of the other tiers. I think another serious issue is the lack of CB for attacking Rose. Like the Leaky Faucet Global War start, strong Spheres giving flimsy or non existent CBs tends to put other Spheres on edge, and for good reason. 

You'll get one response, but I won't deal with you beyond that.  Yes, we outtier Rose, but not by much.  We had the advantage, but the slightest one in years.  Even the upper tier is quite competitive with 45 C30+ for Rose and 52 for Hollywood.  To be clear, the C35+ advantage you mention is a grand total of 12 nations.  It's pretty clear this is competitive with a slight advantage on our end.  With Oasis, we win essentially no tier, and are much more badly outnumbered (doubly so) than with us v. Rose. 

As for the CB for TKR, it's in my post.  Rose's actions last war, which were way out of line in using secret treaties to imbalance a fair war and hypocritical of their past expectations of us during KF.  Meta infractions require that people be held to account.  You'd know that CBs don't often get put into the DoW post if you took more time to listen to folks instead of acting in your normal capacity. 

20 minutes ago, Zevari said:

Basically it is perfectly fine for you guys to selectively pick targets and ensure you outnumber them in your wars, But the second the tables have turned it becomes a terrible dogpile? 

Now aside from all that, In what world would an alliance sit idle while another bigger alliance is going around murdering everyone else? It is clearly in our best interest to stop you in your tracks before it becomes our turn to be attacked.

In general, people enter wars they can win.  No FA person will ever fight a war offensively that they don't think they'd have a good shot to win if they didn't have to fight that war anyways.  That said, this was literally the closest war in 3 years.  Also, I don't call it a dogpile.  Rather, my point is that if we're calling the first war a dogpile, then the Oasis entry makes it a way worse dogpile but for the other side given that it's double the advantage.

It's not Oasis' conflict.  We've operated for years such that spheres uninvolved with a conflict and the rationales behind it are not allowed to enter.  Y'all are breaking meta norms by entering.  I'd also reread my chart about "bigger alliances" because the size issue isn't really apparent based on the actual data. 

 

Edited by Cooper_
Second Reply After Post
  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I woke up to this nice. I honestly was not expecting anyone to randomly jump into the war. Also what is the CB for Oasis? I didn't see one in the announcement.

  • Upvote 1

               

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Cooper_ said:

Hey folks, back at it again with the unsolicited WoT.  Sit back, read, and enjoy a cup of tea!

I think there's a few issues with the Oasis entry into this war.  The foremost of which is the mention of secret treaties.  To enter a bit of context, a primary reason for TKR's entry against Rose was actions that were done last war in the form of secret treaties that imbalanced a global war.  These were secret treaties they maintained with Oasis and HM.  Notably, Rose entered on those secret treaties while the other blocs were hit.  Nonetheless, a secret treaty existed, which you can confirm here:

From an objective perspective, it is suspicious that a previous secret treaty combination is repeating.  Our stance on secret treaties is clear.  They're destructive for the meta.  Oasis is claiming that they entered based on HM's handling of Delta and dissatisfaction with the formation of Hollywood.  For the sake of good faith, let's entertain these claims even if they may seem spurious.

Even if there wasn't a secret treaty, any form of "friendship" or "agreement" if made without paper on the web is an effective secret treaty.  The difference is semantics.  Orbis norms have long been that coalition agreements can only be of offensive nature as the oA has always been seen as a universal for all alliances, but defensive pacts are not allowed.  This was showcased in Knightfall where TKR suffered heavily for secret treaties that either weren't activated or well-known--not to mention changing the course of a global war by the same who used secret treaties later on to hit us in Duck Hunt.  We made mistakes in the past.  There's no doubt.  Because of this, we've wholly transitioned our stance to transparency even when if it comes at political costs.  Our friends in Oasis and Rose have not returned the favor.

Next, folks like @Dr James Wilson talk about the size of Hollywood.  First, the statistics they're showing are score, and not tiering charts.  Let's rectify that with a chart that shows all top 50 alliances (I made this on mobile, so sorry about not doing smaller alliances as it was quite painful already to make) and members that have been active within 2 weeks:

tiering.PNG.8e681e8167355c113ccde8f9e7e0188d.PNG

Hollywood isn't the biggest sphere by a wide margin in terms of total cities nor nations.  The tiering of Hollywood is relatively even throughout with a slight advantage in the upper tiers, but largely comparable to both Rose and Syndispheres.  At the same time, Syndisphere has a large advantage in other tiers and Rose is quite competitive despite being the smallest sphere.  In terms of total city count, Hollywood vs. Rose was about 1.3:1.  This was the closest war in more than 3 years, and nowhere near a dogpile.  After Oasis' entry, this became a 1.6:1 in favor of Rose and Oasis.  Ironically, Oasis' entry made more of an imbalance in both tiering and city counts than the war beforehand.  Moving forward, let's only address using the relevant statistic: tiering.  Score is useless, and y'all know this.

Oasis has also presented claims about Delta's supposed mistreatment at the hands of HM.  From my understanding, the outcome of aggressive actions on behalf of Delta was them escaping without reps.  I don't love terms, but this seems like a slap on the wrist from a sphere that y'all clearly state has done and seen much worse.  Further, if you had an issue with HM and wanted to use it as a CB, then you could consider declaring your own war when there isn't another one going on.  The meta hasn't ever accepted interference in wars, so this is an extremely weak CB and borderline meta-breaking if you try to take this tack.

The sphere size argument is moot with any reasonable observations about the current sphere sizes.  The alternative argument for Delta treatment means that Oasis was planning to interfere in another war, amounting to at best a destruction of long-held Orbis norms.  Thus, even if we dubiously accept there were no secret treaties, we're not left with much but an invalid CB.  Simply put, this just continues Oasis' track record of secret treaties and wars stacked in their favor.  It's disappointing.

Alas, the die is cast and now we fight.  Y'all have the advantage, but my members want the pixels.  Let's see who wins.

 

can we get the list of alliances counted on this chart, was just hoping to see what it looked like

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Ducc Zucc said:

can we get the list of alliances counted on this chart, was just hoping to see what it looked like

Exact replica of top-50 treaty web based on M-levels, excluding VMers and members with more than 2 weeks of inactivity and including training alliances (Rose and TKR don't have training alliances so necessary for comparison), if applicable and not in top-50.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Cooper_ said:

In general, people enter wars they can win.  No FA person will ever fight a war offensively that they don't think they'd have a good shot to win if they didn't have to fight that war anyways.  That said, this was literally the closest war in 3 years.  Also, I don't call it a dogpile.  Rather, my point is that if we're calling the first war a dogpile, then the Oasis entry makes it a way worse dogpile but for the other side given that it's double the advantage.

It's not Oasis' conflict.  We've operated for years such that spheres uninvolved with a conflict and the rationales behind it are not allowed to enter.  Y'all are breaking meta norms by entering.  I'd also reread my chart about "bigger alliances" because the size issue isn't really apparent based on the actual data. 

 

Fair enough, I do agree with your first paragraph.

Although it isn't our conflict I don't think some old meta should really dictate how we operate. At this point in time are we not trying to change up the meta and create new content? (Downsizing spheres etc)

Also at the end of the day a 10%-30% is still a difference, especially so for an alliance who has actively been on a warpath. I would much rather preemptively put down that threat then wait for it to kill all my neighbors and start knocking on my door. (Especially so since the 'punishment of hidden treaties' would technically apply to Oasis since we were part of the quack dogpile)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, Cooper_ said:

You'll get one response, but I won't deal with you beyond that.  Yes, we outtier Rose, but not by much.

I suppose we can all define what we mean by "not by much". So let's do this by percentage. Rose slightly outnumbers you guys in the C1-9 tier, around 8% more in that category. But you guys have 63% more in the C10-12 tier, 320% more in the C11-12 tier, 257% more in the C13-14 tier, 257% more in the C15-16 tier, 191% more in the C17-18 tier, 174% more in the C19-20 tier, and 203% more in the 21-23 tier. 

After this point, we have a few tiers where I would agree that "not by much" applies and a single tier where Rose actually has a bit more than you:

You only have 7% more in the 24-26 tier, around 4% more in the 27-30 tier and the 31-34 tier is the one tier where Rose has more than Hollywood, with Rose having 21% more in that tier than Hollywood. I'm sure Hollywood could more than make up for that based on the fact that in the final 35+ tier, Hollywood has around 71% more nations.

 

Now, with the addition of Oasis, you become outnumbered in every tier but the top one (You still outnumber them by around 38% on that one). I echo Zevari's sentiments on this turn of events.  

 

  

46 minutes ago, Cooper_ said:

As for the CB for TKR, it's in my post.  Rose's actions last war, which were way out of line in using secret treaties to imbalance a fair war and hypocritical of their past expectations of us during KF.  Meta infractions require that people be held to account.  You'd know that CBs don't often get put into the DoW post if you took more time to listen to folks instead of acting in your normal capacity. 

 

In the last war, Rose and other Blocs (including, ironically, HM) agreed to a defensive treaty if Quack were to attack one of their Blocs. As to why they didn't announce it to the world, I'm thinking that part of the reason may well have been that it was literally still being formed to some extent. It seems that Immortals was integral in promoting this defensive treaty and so it stands to reason that Immortals would wish to defend Rose now that they are being punished for agreeing to a treaty that Immortals had promoted. I know that's not the reason Tyrion gave for entering this war, but from a poetic justice perspective, it makes sense for that reason as well as the reasons he gave. 

Edited by Phoenyx
Added information
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Zevari said:

Basically it is perfectly fine for you guys to selectively pick targets and ensure you outnumber them in your wars, But the second the tables have turned it becomes a terrible dogpile? 

Now aside from all that, In what world would an alliance sit idle while another bigger alliance is going around murdering everyone else? It is clearly in our best interest to stop you in your tracks before it becomes our turn to be attacked.

Blindsiding an alliance every time they go on the offensive is surely not a worthwhile precedent to maintain for the sake of this game's meta and overall health. Unless you would rather force every sphere into shells, waiting for the other to make a move, stagnating in perpetuity or crushing them with a sucker punch when they finally strike.

As an alternative, spheres could join together and make coalitions so large that it could not be opposed by any counter attack, and then you might actually have reason to fear being next on the chopping block. Neither of these are options I think anyone would enjoy.

Also Rose is hardly "everyone else" lol

Denison-1.png

Look up to the sky above~

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Zevari said:

Fair enough, I do agree with your first paragraph.

Although it isn't our conflict I don't think some old meta should really dictate how we operate. At this point in time are we not trying to change up the meta and create new content? (Downsizing spheres etc)

Also at the end of the day a 10%-30% is still a difference, especially so for an alliance who has actively been on a warpath. I would much rather preemptively put down that threat then wait for it to kill all my neighbors and start knocking on my door. (Especially so since the 'punishment of hidden treaties' would technically apply to Oasis since we were part of the quack dogpile)

 Preempting an attack that was never going to happen. I was with Swamp in Duck Hunt. We had a valid CB since TCW, our direct ally was attacked. I'm fairly certain everyone in Hollywood is aware of this. Rose was the one with nothing to go on and refusing to give quack a valid CB the entire war. 

               

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lord Vader said:

So we're bad...
...Because our members are good?

I dont think it has anything to do with that. I see why yall are hitting rose. As payback for some shady moves during gw16. But HM alone already had the best high tier in the game to take any bloc, not to mention TKR bloc is more than enough capable on thier own. The problem is over the last month everyone has been cheering for more blocs, more political freedom and fluidity in the game. Hell every episode of morf radio there was talks about it. But now with essentially quack 1.5 being made, it directly goes against what everyone has been saying they want (even some tkr bloc gov). Not to mention oasis has been working towards more political fluidity since gw16. I hate to say it. But signing hm was kinda weak. If yall are really that good, than why do you need them. Why not make wars more interesting. Why not make the political side of the game more engaging But instead we are stuck with another shit war with hollywood ganging up on rose and oasis ganging up on HM. Its utter shit. I prefer more blocs, more balance of power. It keeps things interesting. But ig another shit throwing contest it shall be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
55 minutes ago, Cooper_ said:

To be clear, the C35+ advantage you mention is a grand total of 12 nations.

I mean this is pretty misleading. You’re saying a “grand total of 12 nations” to make it seem insignificant but what really matters is the ratio. Sure 100 to 112 doesn’t matter.

 

29 to 17? Not to mention “35+” doesn’t give context for the fact that grumpyguard + other Hollywood* has basically 20~ C35+s which are near, at or above c40 while Rose’s C35+ are relatively closer to c35 than c40

29 to 17 is  a 1.7 to 1 ratio which when translated into daily plane rebuy and having blitz adv is huge too, with scores too the c35+ will translate down to c31-34 tiers as well, I would definitely not call your odds vs Rose initially a “slight advantage” it’s a pretty decent one tiering wise on paper.

 

in the actual setting with Rose not being max milled and getting blitzed even with Oasis joining in you guys should be able to hold upper tier, especially since the consensus on Oasis’ milcom isn’t the best.

You guys have the blitz, tempo on buys and numbers to hold down top tier and cascade the advantage down in high tier at least.

This is of course provided that you guys  literally just cycle them correctly.

Edited by KingGhost
  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Arln Nen said:

 Preempting an attack that was never going to happen. I was with Swamp in Duck Hunt. We had a valid CB since TCW, our direct ally was attacked. I'm fairly certain everyone in Hollywood is aware of this. Rose was the one with nothing to go on and refusing to give quack a valid CB the entire war. 

My understanding is their reasoning was the same as everyone else's in the anti Quack force leadership. Tyrion gets into it in the following post:

 

Edited by Phoenyx
Link to comment
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...
 Share

  • 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.