Jump to content

[DoW] Here we go again


Azazel
 Share

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, MRBOOTY said:

A couple of things:

 

1. I think it's very reasonable and expected for TKR and Hollywood to be upset by this. The numbers were fairly even when it was Rose + Oasis Vs. Hollywood, and this gives us the CLEAR numerical advantage (even if I'm still getting killed in the whale tier). It's not whining, I think they have legit reason to be upset. 

 

2. I do think that Hollywood set themselves up to feel vindicated about creating their bloc regardless though. Let me explain: if they win they'll say "See, this was a good idea, we rolled Rose". If they lose after other AAs come in, they can say "see, this was necessary, there are secret treaties out there"... and if they win now that multiple spheres are fighting them they could potentially have both. I'm not saying they're in the wrong for this.... if anything it's good foreign policy, but this is just an observation. 

 

3. This dosen't really make sense. If we wanted a meat shield, why in the world would we put ourselves in the position to be hit first? That's the opposite of what a meatshield does lol. Likewise, I was asked on Morf's radio show why we didn't militarize, and it was suggested that it was because gov knew that we had allies coming in, instead of us just straight not thinking that we were the target. Even if we did have a master plan with paperless alliances, why wouldn't we militarize anyway? I got in the first attack in all three defensive wars but was overwhelmed because I had no ground forces, resulting in hundreds of millions in infra losses. Across the alliance we have to have lost billions already. Why would we intentionally walk into this?



 

i like how they ignore your logical points. 

  • Upvote 1

fa26a3b82631cca1f44e769844a618f1.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Emperor Adam said:

The amount of players will inevitably take down the average wars. Hard to agree with that thought process. 

9 minutes ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

I actually agree with Adam here, I used that same stat like a week or two ago, and after I thought about it, I was like... well we should be higher because we are all old as shit and have seen many wars.  tho comparing it with other "whale alliances" they dont come close to our number despite having a smaller sample size.  I also believe in our entire history, we have only skipped one major global, and that was when we were less than a year old and had like 15 members.

You are still the best tho Hodor!

E404 has 110 wars/nations and I'd consider them very small and they have 1 nation that existed before 2019. 95/96 of their nations were created in the last 15 months.

EDIT: also didn't they just start tracking wars lost/won like 2 years ago or am I making that up?

There is no apples to apples comparison, then. You've said the other whale alliances are absolutely pixel huggers. Seems there isn't a data point to prove you wrong. We're just too set in our opinions I guess.

8 minutes ago, KillzBob said:

i like how they ignore your logical points. 

You're a better troll than this. 30 mins whilst we are in the middle of a chat with Adam is not ignoring. Booty knows he is loved and cherished.

Edited by Hodor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

I actually agree with Adam here, I used that same stat like a week or two ago, and after I thought about it, I was like... well we should be higher because we are all old as shit and have seen many wars.  tho comparing it with other "whale alliances" they dont come close to our number despite having a smaller sample size.  I also believe in our entire history, we have only skipped one major global, and that was when we were less than a year old and had like 15 members.

You are still the best tho Hodor!

You also turn away a lot of players that would bring the average down. No one in Grumpy wants to get into a war to find out some guy on his 10th city grant doesn't want to fight. It is why they are in Grumpy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, MRBOOTY said:

1. I think it's very reasonable and expected for TKR and Hollywood to be upset by this. The numbers were fairly even when it was Rose + Oasis Vs. Hollywood, and this gives us the CLEAR numerical advantage (even if I'm still getting killed in the whale tier). It's not whining, I think they have legit reason to be upset. 

Agreed.

32 minutes ago, MRBOOTY said:

2. I do think that Hollywood set themselves up to feel vindicated about creating their bloc regardless though. Let me explain: if they win they'll say "See, this was a good idea, we rolled Rose". If they lose after other AAs come in, they can say "see, this was necessary, there are secret treaties out there"... and if they win now that multiple spheres are fighting them they could potentially have both. I'm not saying they're in the wrong for this.... if anything it's good foreign policy, but this is just an observation. 

Not too sure about this. I'm no longer FA. I am just happy to be fighting a war. If we lose, as we suspect we will, then that's that. It'll be interesting to see what happens post war. If we win, I *strongly* suggest y'all look in the mirror and come up with a game plan to improve instead of hee hawing about hegemony being the reason.

32 minutes ago, MRBOOTY said:

3. This dosen't really make sense. If we wanted a meat shield, why in the world would we put ourselves in the position to be hit first? That's the opposite of what a meatshield does lol. Likewise, I was asked on Morf's radio show why we didn't militarize, and it was suggested that it was because gov knew that we had allies coming in, instead of us just straight not thinking that we were the target. Even if we did have a master plan with paperless alliances, why wouldn't we militarize anyway? I got in the first attack in all three defensive wars but was overwhelmed because I had no ground forces, resulting in hundreds of millions in infra losses. Across the alliance we have to have lost billions already. Why would we intentionally walk into this?

What did Rose do to put themselves in the position to be hit first? I don't understand this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Hodor said:

Agreed.

Not too sure about this. I'm no longer FA. I am just happy to be fighting a war. If we lose, as we suspect we will, then that's that. It'll be interesting to see what happens post war. If we win, I *strongly* suggest y'all look in the mirror and come up with a game plan to improve instead of hee hawing about hegemony being the reason.

What did Rose do to put themselves in the position to be hit first? I don't understand this.

thank you for doing your duty my hodor :) 

  • Like 1

fa26a3b82631cca1f44e769844a618f1.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Hodor said:

EDIT: also didn't they just start tracking wars lost/won like 2 years ago or am I making that up?

Oh that is a good call, I forgot about that. but even still we have an age advantage over most of the mass member alliances that makes it difficult for them to compete.  But yes I would think our average war numbers would speak for themselves, for people that are ignorant enough to think we are infra huggers.  I also believe in this current war we averaging just under 4 offensive wars per member.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last few pages seem to be what happens when the whales suspect T$ isn't there for them anymore. T$ might wish to remedy this, unless they begin to believe nobody loves them, which I suspect would make them sad.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Senatorius said:

Would actually like to know.... why didn't Rose mil up? Since it was raised.

Incompetence?

2 minutes ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

Oh that is a good call, I forgot about that. but even still we have an age advantage over most of the mass member alliances that makes it difficult for them to compete.  But yes I would think our average war numbers would speak for themselves, for people that are ignorant enough to think we are infra huggers.  I also believe in this current war we averaging just under 4 offensive wars per member.

As someone that has fought both with and against Grumpy, anyone that thinks they are pixel huggers is incredibly ignorant.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Who Me said:

Incompetence?

As someone that has fought both with and against Grumpy, anyone that thinks they are pixel huggers is incredibly ignorant.

you using your military this war? or you just lobbing nukes like always?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

you using your military this war? or you just lobbing nukes like always?

Military so far but I'm sure those nukes will come into play soon enough.  lol

I must say, it is much nicer to have you guys countering for me than against me this time around. 🤣

Edited by Who Me
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MRBOOTY said:

This dosen't really make sense. If we wanted a meat shield, why in the world would we put ourselves in the position to be hit first? That's the opposite of what a meatshield does lol. Likewise, I was asked on Morf's radio show why we didn't militarize, and it was suggested that it was because gov knew that we had allies coming in, instead of us just straight not thinking that we were the target. Even if we did have a master plan with paperless alliances, why wouldn't we militarize anyway? I got in the first attack in all three defensive wars but was overwhelmed because I had no ground forces, resulting in hundreds of millions in infra losses. Across the alliance we have to have lost billions already. Why would we intentionally walk into this?

 

You can spare the semanitcs lesson m8, I know what a meatshield is. Now if you're done trying to spin it with this vague narrative, please be aware I know who put this all together, namely through years of optional (that then turned to paperless) treaties with alliances like TFP or WTF.

All that + alliances Rose claimed to have parted with + good ol' treaty chess through indirect treaties has resulted in this kind of disgusting blob that, when it was on opposite sides of your alliance, they didn't seem to be okay with.

Just be happy with the partly paperless blob your alliance managed to build and have a nice day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Hwan said:

This table is obvious fact manufacturing...
Setting aside the fact that you still have more 35+ nations than the 3 spheres you're fighting;

They also have higher city counts. The reason there isn't a separate 35-40 tier and a 40+ on the graph is because this is Rose's 35+ (yes they're not all 35 but i can't be bothered to crop and stuff)

Hi friend, this is virtually the same sheet I used last war when I was fighting G/G and had no incentive to hide their tiering.  I believe if you add Yarr and RnR into your analysis, the 40+ tier becomes closer not to mention that Rose dominates that low-30 tier with their tiering at C32.  I'd also throw out that 2 of the 3 spheres have heavy tiering advantages at the low and mid tiers by design, so in reality we're only fighting one (and a little bit for Oasis and Cam) of the 3 spheres with a real upper tier, Rose, with the third one being Syndi. 

Hollywood doesn't even have the majority of nations at C35+, and other spheres have similar percentages of tiers at the lower and mid levels.  If Hollywood has consolidated the upper tier, then Oasis has consolidated the low tiers and Syndi/Rose and the upper-mid tiers.  In order for the argument to work, everyone else has to be guilty of consolidating a different tier as well.  I think the simpler logical outcome is that different spheres have different advantages and disadvantages.  Hollywood is relatively much weaker in the low tiers while having strength in the upper tiers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Redarmy said:

Where are you going is the real question. 

No, the real question is, when is rose going to be competent enough to win a war without a 3-1 or more advantage?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Who Me said:

No, the real question is, when is rose going to be competent enough to win a war without a 3-1 or more advantage?

I disagree. I need know where we are going. I don't want to look silly if pack beach clothing when we're heading to the mountains. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Redarmy said:

I disagree. I need know where we are going. I don't want to look silly if pack beach clothing when we're heading to the mountains. 

Well, if you guys keep blobing up like this I would imagine we are going back to a bipolar world as much as some of you folks keep preaching about mini spheres.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Who Me said:

Incompetence?

How does the saying go, again? Those who live in glass houses should not throw nukes? 🤔

 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2
xzhPlEh.png?1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Who Me said:

Well, if you guys keep blobing up like this I would imagine we are going back to a bipolar world as much as some of you folks keep preaching about mini spheres.

 I'm not your guy, pal. Joking aside.

Don't generalize with me. I hate that bullshit. Its disingenuous and doesn't move the dialogue forward. I'm very vocal about about my feelings with ASM and my little Bloc to the point I'm sure some them wish I was somewhere else. Matter of fact I told Valk I was disappointed with what Rose did on Friday. I like mini spheres. I was one who pushed for something like Chaos Bloc.  

Edited by Redarmy
Spelling
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey I love these accusations, the fact that Hollywood has I think 13 members with 40 or more cities, and Rose only has 5 or 6 in their bloc and this makes us an unstoppable force in a game with just under 40,000 players. (nice work on growing the player base there Sheeps) 

You guys know I love nothing more than to brag about how awesome Grumpy is, but even I dont think I can go that far.

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Emperor Adam said:

It's a function that completely tears apart your "lol just catch up??? Incompetent econ???" narrative.

 

If (lets roughly estimate) 25% of the year for most aas is war, compared to roughly (generously) 10-15% for Grumpys whales.... how do you feasibly expect us to catch up? Not only do you have more revenue by means of cities, you're also interupted significantly less.

 

The exponential cost slows you down a bit, but pretending it balances anything is below you and you're smarter than that claim.

 

As for "always picks easy fights", you do. There isn't any difficult fight for you in orbis. Some will take a bit longer to win, but in current state Grumpy will always win. And you'll always grow exponential faster.

Let me ask you something.

How did KingGhost caught up?

how did Vein,Pascal,Hughes,Neantasia,Murtaza,Vrael,Kratos ??

they are your allys/member ,why dont you ask them?

thats where competency comes in play

Edited by Master
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Kurdanak said:

How does the saying go, again? Those who live in glass houses should not throw nukes? 🤔

 

Is that all you have?  lol I use the proper tool at the proper time. I'm pretty sure I haven't launched any nukes so far in this war. I'm sure that time will come but that time is not now.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Who Me said:

Is that all you have?  lol I use the proper tool at the proper time. I'm pretty sure I haven't launched any nukes so far in this war. I'm sure that time will come but that time is not now.

He kinda has a point, the war is less than two days old, and you have launched so many nukes over your history that you cant even remember if you have launched any nukes this war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hodor said:

I disagree. I have only been in Grumpy for 250 days. In that time I've added 4-5 cities because of no taxes, no interest loans, and a culture which values growth. Much of Grumpy came from somewhere else and they weren't all whales when they arrived. They've become big because it's one of the priorities of the AA and it's what draws certain individuals to it. Other AAs could imitate this and grow, it's just not their model. Nations aren't created as whales, they become whales because of choices and priorities.

I'd also like to note that Grumpy fights quite a bit more than your average alliance as well. For instance, here is the to 10 alliances with their wars/member:

1. Rose - 83 wars

2. TKR - 148 wars

3. t$ - 133 wars

4. TI - 95 wars

5. TFP - 59 wars

6, Cam - 60 wars

7. Grumpy - 210 wars

8. Eclipse - 109 wars

9. Guardian - 102 wars

10. The Order - 74 wars

 

I mean, that's pretty glaring, no?

 

I mean, if you look back far enough you'll see I never held that against NPO. It truly was the only way to flip damages for them. It is a tool for those who can't manage to do what I've outline above though.

Who would have thought an alliance filled with retired raiders and some of the oldest nations in the game would have the highest average war count?

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.