Jump to content

A Treatise on the Current War


Agent W
 Share

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Emperor Adam said:

image.png.62d043a233fa9b5ed1207a6896a7f558.png

 

Numbers for Rose and Syndi are up and GoB's is down, but the disparity is still tehere and the new 30-32's don't change the downdec argument. 

Tbh, I think this only proves that tS vs Grumpy (in a 1v1) would be a difficult fight and not one that can be won immediately or within a few rounds. Often ignored is the fact that tS only has to drag a Grumpy nation one at a time and that any pinned Grumpy nation can never rebuild entirely by virtue of numbers alone, whereas any zeroed tS nation can rebuild by virtue of there being 100 nations below c30 in eS + tS to prop them back up onto their feet. The underdog mechanics and spy mechanics ensure that military rebuilds are pretty much decimated day-to-day for Grumpy (ensuring they will eventually be ZMd when you also consider the numbers advantage tS has). In tS vs Grumpy, tS's victory is inevitable in a direct war and the fact that c40 costs like 3b ensures that tS will inevitable catch up to Grumpy once their scores of nations slowly (but faster than Grumpy c40s) acquire cities.

However, I also think that not wanting to waste a month or two to prove tS can win a legitimate 1v1 is also valid, and damned be the narratives that preach "you are too scared for a fair fight", since I don't recall the last GW or major war that wasn't an attempted dogpile (plus wars lasting months are boring as hell). But claiming Grumpy is near OP and/or invincible, in a 1v1, is laughable, it took about a day to pin HW with BW + Rose, and so it'd take longer w/o Rose, but it isn't impossible.

TLDR: BW should be transparent in its CB and just state that as a direct rival to HW they want them knocked down a peg and don't want to fight for 1-2+ months to do so (a boring waste of time tbh), which is completely fine IMO. I just think the difficulty of beating Grumpy/GG is greatly overstated. 

Edited by EliteCanada
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, EliteCanada said:

Tbh, I think this only proves that tS vs Grumpy (in a 1v1) would be a difficult fight and not one that can be won immediately or within a few rounds. Often ignored is the fact that tS only has to drag a Grumpy nation one at a time and that any pinned Grumpy nation can never rebuild entirely by virtue of numbers alone, whereas any zeroed tS nation can rebuild by virtue of there being 100 nations below c30 in eS + tS to prop them back up onto their feet. The underdog mechanics and spy mechanics ensure that military rebuilds are pretty much decimated day-to-day for Grumpy (ensuring they will eventually be ZMd when you also consider the numbers advantage tS has). In tS vs Grumpy, tS's victory is inevitable in a direct war and the fact that c40 costs like 3b ensures that tS will inevitable catch up to Grumpy once their scores of nations slowly (but faster than Grumpy c40s) acquire cities.

However, I also think that not wanting to waste a month or two to prove tS can win a legitimate 1v1 is also valid, and damned be the narratives that preach "you are too scared for a fair fight", since I don't recall the last GW or major war that wasn't an attempted dogpile (plus wars lasting months are boring as hell). But claiming Grumpy is near OP and/or invincible, in a 1v1, is laughable, it took about a day to pin HW with BW + Rose, and so it'd take longer w/o Rose, but it isn't impossible.

TLDR: BW should be transparent in its CB and just state that as a direct rival to HW they want them knocked down a peg and don't want to fight for 1-2+ months to do so (a boring waste of time tbh), which is completely fine IMO. I just think the difficulty of beating Grumpy/GG is greatly overstated. 

The drag down mechanics has been on display in multiple wars- especially NPOLT, Grumpy eventually were all drug down.

Though with current ground mechanics I think the process would have taken much longer and been a much bigger resource burn for NPO to achieve.

Basically NPO would have needed triple the koreaboo slaves

Edited by Bollocks

The Coalition Discord: https://discord.gg/WBzNRGK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, EliteCanada said:

Tbh, I think this only proves that tS vs Grumpy (in a 1v1) would be a difficult fight and not one that can be won immediately or within a few rounds. Often ignored is the fact that tS only has to drag a Grumpy nation one at a time and that any pinned Grumpy nation can never rebuild entirely by virtue of numbers alone, whereas any zeroed tS nation can rebuild by virtue of there being 100 nations below c30 in eS + tS to prop them back up onto their feet. The underdog mechanics and spy mechanics ensure that military rebuilds are pretty much decimated day-to-day for Grumpy (ensuring they will eventually be ZMd when you also consider the numbers advantage tS has). In tS vs Grumpy, tS's victory is inevitable in a direct war and the fact that c40 costs like 3b ensures that tS will inevitable catch up to Grumpy once their scores of nations slowly (but faster than Grumpy c40s) acquire cities.

However, I also think that not wanting to waste a month or two to prove tS can win a legitimate 1v1 is also valid, and damned be the narratives that preach "you are too scared for a fair fight", since I don't recall the last GW or major war that wasn't an attempted dogpile (plus wars lasting months are boring as hell). But claiming Grumpy is near OP and/or invincible, in a 1v1, is laughable, it took about a day to pin HW with BW + Rose, and so it'd take longer w/o Rose, but it isn't impossible.

TLDR: BW should be transparent in its CB and just state that as a direct rival to HW they want them knocked down a peg and don't want to fight for 1-2+ months to do so (a boring waste of time tbh), which is completely fine IMO. I just think the difficulty of beating Grumpy/GG is greatly overstated. 

This is assuming that Grumpy plays the war incredibly poorly, bordering on incompetence. The truth is that by the time that tS would drag Grumpy, they would already be able to rebuild just from their war revenue alone. This isn't just my words, but has been specifically stated as evidenced by Vali's screenshot.

Untitled.png

  • Upvote 3

Former Imperial Officer of Internal Affairs and Emperor of the New Pacific Order, Founder of the Syndicate, Current Chief Global Strategist of the Syndicate.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Prefontaine said:

I’m just happy to see someone hold those Villains in GoB accountable for their heinous attack against Yarr last war. 
 

The most I was able to do in retaliation was join Guardian and become SRDs ally and deprive him on the ability to attack me. 
 

‘Sup @Eumirbago, how’re things?

Why do you think I started talking about rolling tS everywhere people would listen?  I saw you joined Guardian, and wanted to get you rolled again. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/20/2021 at 1:44 PM, Shiho Nishizumi said:

The membership sticks through thick and thin, as it's actually proven by history. Same about the AA itself. The FA climate often dictates the wars to be fought, which is well beyond the control of most people. 

From what I understand you guys almost fell apart a few months ago before a few guys from HM came in and saved tS. 

EDIT: It was brought to my attention by Leo that this was about 18 months ago. My apologies, you guys almost feel apart 18 months ago.

Edited by Sweeeeet Ronny D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Agent W said:

This is assuming that Grumpy plays the war incredibly poorly, bordering on incompetence. The truth is that by the time that tS would drag Grumpy, they would already be able to rebuild just from their war revenue alone. This isn't just my words, but has been specifically stated as evidenced by Vali's screenshot.

Untitled.png

I would say the same about tS for it to lose. you have 3 times our membership numbers, and you have the up declare advantage of being able to hit us, and us not being able to hit you, if we hit first we will probably decimate your top 30-40 members but you will drag us, and there isn't much we can do about it. 

Also for what Vali said to be true, it would have to take you about 5-6 weeks to drag us.  But like you guys, and any competent alliance we have warchests, so generally before the war starts most of us already have enough to rebuild post war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Emperor Adam said:

I see we've hit the Godwin's law of PnW. When you (or your FA, as Cooper has yet to fulfill his promise of responding) has an actual argument let me know, yeah?

The argument is that if Grumpy is your problem then you should ask them for a 1 vs 1 or even a BW vs Grumpy since everyone under 27-28 cities doesn't matter in that match, I'm sure they will accept the challenge

Instead you keep saying that it's impossible to beat Grumpy if you don't have the help of another huge block like Rosesphere and that's very bad for your reputation in my opinion, you're either insecure and coward or aware of your incompetence

Are we sure that the unbeaten record you like to flaunt isn't the problem? Because history has proven that the only way to lose in this game is to think you can win it

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Prefontaine said:

Let me know when you want some tips, rookie.

I'm not the one who has to be good at war. #ZIzigbigadorlou

Hey Krampus, the signature edit is under account settings. Actually, here's the link.

https://forum.politicsandwar.com/index.php?/settings/signature/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Micchan said:

Are we sure that the unbeaten record you like to flaunt isn't the problem? Because history has proven that the only way to lose in this game is to think you can win it

We already won the game

Lxr4VfE.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/20/2021 at 9:47 PM, Prefontaine said:

Let me know when you want some tips, rookie.

Can I have tips

21 hours ago, Emperor Adam said:

I see we've hit the Godwin's law of PnW

You made me look something up >:c

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean you can’t blame people for being afraid of upper tier consolidation after seeing what happened in another world. 
 

I've never been a fan of trying to justify CB for a war with “you did x first” as it’s literally the most unoriginal way to play PR since the game went live. On one hand I totally feel for SRD and his squad. Hitting because of hypothetical war talk has been a fallback cb since TAC war, and in my opinion those talks are something everyone does or should do.  But on the other hand you guys shamelessly invite big nations from everywhere else and probably alone can feed everyone on orbis. You’re experienced fighters, have some very prolific players, and you’re rich as hell. You’re clearly able to bounce back quickly from wars. I don’t know why it’s worth even bothering to put on a surprised face when people perceive you as a threat. 
 

I am just a long retired gov member in rose I have no authority in government and do not speak on behalf of the rose government. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/20/2021 at 1:28 PM, Agent W said:

...The above paragraph gives you a look into our thought process leading up to the war, but the question of why pick this fight in the first place still remains...

I guess your effort at a sale's pitch is appreciated, and maybe even accurate if looked at squinty-eyed, through a narrow gap and reflected off a convex mirror. It is not my place to distinguish your truth from fantasy, only to respond that as a non-gov member in opposition, not involved in the self-harm of FA, I think your argument is weak.

Oh I know what you're thinking '...who are you newbie...TKR whining about being dogpiled...get some stats up first...where's Cooper/BigMorf...Godwin's law...' etc etc.  Well my friends, your buddies attempts to ridicule our line members out of this conversation does not put you in a good light.  Yelling for our FA gov in response to those not of your 'superior' class, or implying that an opposing non-gov member's forum contribution is feeding your meagre store of FA capital are NPO moves through and through.

So you've got a long-term beef with GG and have basically failed to nail them time and again.  Brought in Rose to deal with TKR so you could give it another shot and concocted a pissweak story about whale/upper tier consolidation, something flippant that SRD said, and a preemptive strike due to HW militarization.  GW19 clearly seems a product of t$ vanity and an unresolved jock-itch.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Celer Et Audax

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Upper tier consolation and hypothetical war talks has been CBs long before Roq got here and will continue to be here. Honestly, I felt after the radio show that SDR was on, which I was a guest for, that next war was already lined up with the back and forth. I assumed others felt the same way  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Redarmy said:

Upper tier consolation and hypothetical war talks has been CBs long before Roq got here and will continue to be here. Honestly, I felt after the radio show that SDR was on, which I was a guest for, that next war was already lined up with the back and forth. I assumed others felt the same way  

Hard to believe some people didn't expect this war since the Hollywood announcement considering all the craze about upper tier consolidation.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Etat said:

So you've got a long-term beef with GG and have basically failed to nail them time and again.  Brought in Rose to deal with TKR so you could give it another shot and concocted a pissweak story about whale/upper tier consolidation, something flippant that SRD said, and a preemptive strike due to HW militarization.  GW19 clearly seems a product of t$ vanity and an unresolved jock-itch.

There are several things which dictate whether a stance/narrative is consistent or flimsy. Time it's been held for (and whether it was ommitted or not at an opportune time), maneuvers made during such time, etc dictate such.

Our stance has been such for years by this point, held by people of vastly different backgrounds (so much for it being a grudge), and backed by yes, several actions; in fact, the only time t$ and GG worked together was during NPOLT, the latter half of which at that, and given the state of affairs at the time, I'd say was more than understandable to be the extraordinary exception. It's also remained in spite of, yes, some of said actions failing. That doesn't detract to the stance, but rather add to it because it shows commitment to it in spite of adversities. All in all, it is inarguably one of the most consistent stances in this game, and arguably the most consistent one.

Just to contrast it with another stance, I'll take your alliance's about minispheres. Credit where credit is due, Chaos was most certainly one. But then you got smashed by KETOGG. NPOLT happens subsequently and we arrive at Quack. It was most certainly not a minisphere, but I won't at all hold it as a mark against you due to the stuff I have already mentioned in the original DoW thread (iirc), and given the genuine effort I had seen been undertaken to accommodate for such sphere. We fast forward to GW16 where Quack gets rolled as basically a result of a paperless machination, and past that, to the dissolution of Quack and the forming of HW. Which was, at the time... kind of a side grade to Quack. In the interim between GW16 and that, I noticed that your gov both in public and private shifted to more or less a stance of "Well we would really like minispheres but they can't reeeeaaaaallly be made to work because people choose security first.", and when presented with a clean slate, your government goes with this side grade kind of thing and pretends that things are okay and still consistent with the stance they had. That's basically where it was readily apparent to people that you had gone full on for security and were just trying to suit the narrative to fit it. That's where, imo, an inconsistency that had no real justification to exist popped up to undermine your stance. And it's not like it's changed ever since. If anything, it's been doubled down on.

Perhaps overly drawn out, but I felt that it was warranted to address it properly. Mainly because, quite frankly, your take was exceptionally poor. The rest of the post was also addressed in some way or another here, so I won't bother rehashing.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3
 
G3.gif.d8066d8dc749ad2d0835fe69095fa73b.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Agent W

In some ways, this post is an improvement upon the original stated CB because I think we all recognize that they were not substantiated nor justifiable.  The first few lines do justice that these weren't your reasons, but the latter paragraphs then just try to justify them again.

Our biggest response to all of T$' points has been a request to just be unequivocal about your intent.  You don't like what you perceive as "upper tier consolidation" in GG.  Some of us thinks that's overblown, but we can have that argument without the muddling that is the other claims being made.  

I'll just briefly touch on those.  First, the ghosts from OB and Grumpy.  Let me be clear.  We in no way would ever conspire against our own allies.  I'll even add that OB was then the major party who responded to KT despite their members ghosting in KT.  This isn't a reason nor is it an indication of anything.  

Second, the statement made by SRD.  I just did a brief search in our own embassy, RON, and some other public places.  Some of the refrains associated with T$ gov (not just eumir) and Grumpy is bad,  threat, needs to take damage (you get the point).  SRD admitted that T$ was a potential target, but that TKR and its other allies in HW rejected that.  Even if we forget SRD's IC character, you can't really claim a highground here.  

I'd also like to clarify the timeline since you seem to make out that we didn't communicate.  This isn't true:
On 8/14: I inquire in the T$ embassy about your militarization and mention that we're concerned about it.  Gray responds that it is for the C20+ to prevent raids.
Later on 8/14: HW internals recognize that there was a change in the MMR builds of E$ and CTO outside the parameters given, and HW was already on edge after all of the shit flinging T$ did last war.  The decision was made to militarize since not militarizing could result in us getting hit like Rose during GnR.  Rose follows us.
On 8/15: Eclipse asks TKR about our militarization.  We respond that we're concerned and milled up in response given how Rose got hit during GnR.
On 8/17: HW decided that once it reached full militarization and was in a position to negotiate to reach out to both.  We asked directly to Rose and T$ to work together to deescalate acknowledging the possibility that T$ may have actually been just militarizing for KT and that Rose and our militarization was reactionary.  You hit us later that day.

Every step of the way we were openly communicating our intent, and it takes some serious 4-D upon 4-D chess to conceive a way where we were not being transparent about our intent.  The likely scenario is that you saw the sunk cost of militarization, you wanted to get your hit in to take out a perceived threat, and you had Rose who could be mobilized off of their grudge.  It's a brazen and political move, but we can't really begin to break it down until we get on the same page.  

On 8/21/2021 at 2:43 PM, Emperor Adam said:

Cooper has yet to fulfill his promise of responding

Friend, moving and hangovers take precedence over WoTs.  Unfortunate, but as life goes.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Cooper_ said:

Friend, moving and hangovers take precedence over WoTs.  Unfortunate, but as life goes.

 

 

heavy drinking bad

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

In paradisum deducant te Angeli; in tuo adventu suscipiant te martyres, et perducant te in civitatem sanctam Ierusalem.
Chorus angelorum te suscipiat, et cüm Lazaro quondam paupere æternam habeas requiem.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/21/2021 at 12:47 AM, Prefontaine said:

Let me know when you want some tips, rookie.

Gib Tips

TCM3_1_281x175.png.d5f909d45f36d3dcb3722580e7b7ecc2.png
Coal Duke (Imperator Emeritus) of The Coal Mines
Diety Emeritus of The Immortals, Patres Conscripti (President Emeritus) of the Independent Republic of Orange Nations, Lieutenant Emeritus of Black Skies, Imperator Emeritus of the Valyrian Freehold, Imperator Emeritus of the Divine Phoenix, Prefect Emeritus of Carthago, Regent Emeritus of the New Polar Order

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Etat said:

I guess your effort at a sale's pitch is appreciated, and maybe even accurate if looked at squinty-eyed, through a narrow gap and reflected off a convex mirror. It is not my place to distinguish your truth from fantasy, only to respond that as a non-gov member in opposition, not involved in the self-harm of FA, I think your argument is weak.

Oh I know what you're thinking '...who are you newbie...TKR whining about being dogpiled...get some stats up first...where's Cooper/BigMorf...Godwin's law...' etc etc.  Well my friends, your buddies attempts to ridicule our line members out of this conversation does not put you in a good light.  Yelling for our FA gov in response to those not of your 'superior' class, or implying that an opposing non-gov member's forum contribution is feeding your meagre store of FA capital are NPO moves through and through.

So you've got a long-term beef with GG and have basically failed to nail them time and again.  Brought in Rose to deal with TKR so you could give it another shot and concocted a pissweak story about whale/upper tier consolidation, something flippant that SRD said, and a preemptive strike due to HW militarization.  GW19 clearly seems a product of t$ vanity and an unresolved jock-itch.

If you had any concept of who I am, or my history, you would find it funny how unironically bad this take is. I joined P&W in Beta, I came back after launch to found the Syndicate. For a while, I left the Syndicate to join Church of Spaceology, after NPOLT and the disbandment of CoS, I rejoined tS, and after some time, first became a VP, and then an Exec. What does that have to do with your point? Becoming VP and Exec were my first two government positions I have ever held in P&W minus a short stint in Beta. So to imply I am somehow grandstanding about how irrelevant being a member is false.
 

Do you want to talk about NPO? I'm one of the subject matter experts in that area. I've been a member of NPO, so has your former leader Lordship. Ever since the day NPO joined this game, I banged the alarm bell, I made it clear who NPO was, and what they could eventually do to this world. Like in most things, my knowledge, my understanding was proven right. Not to mention that due to NPO's actions during NPOLT, I lost my home, Church of Spaceology. For you to come into this thread and spew drivel about how my actions mimic NPO's is ignorant at best, and dishonest at worst. Perhaps you can ask people in your government for the history lesson you so desperately need.

I don't think it's fair to say we've failed to nail them, but our repeated conflict has largely stemmed from an understanding to learn the lessons needed from past wars. I'm being literal when I say this war has been fought before. I'm not sure if you've heard of it, but I'd look up Knightfall on the P&W Wiki. Time passes however, and alignments change, as they did with the creation of Quack, and a new treaty between tS-TKR. We know the story by now. After Quack dissolved, TKR opted to create the same sphere tS had issues with dating back to Knightfall. TKR clearly has forgotten the lesson of that war, and we all know the saying about doing the same thing and expecting different results.

  • Like 2

Former Imperial Officer of Internal Affairs and Emperor of the New Pacific Order, Founder of the Syndicate, Current Chief Global Strategist of the Syndicate.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Perhaps overly drawn out, but I felt that it was warranted to address it properly. Mainly because, quite frankly, your take was exceptionally poor. The rest of the post was also addressed in some way or another here, so I won't bother rehashing.

I appreciate your response!  But despite your words, you've only confirmed my position...you've long term issues with GG (I'm not challenging any justification you might have), and you've manufactured a weak reason for bringing in Rose and creating yet another global war to scratch that itch.  The rest of what you're dredging up about minispheres, though perhaps pertinent in your head and influential in how you perceive TKR, is pretty much a red herring to the issue in question.

Celer Et Audax

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.