What makes a war a global war?

[Changeup]

This is a discussion that came up frequently during the Johnsons-HM conflict (which, btw, is definitely not a global) and has been reignited after Clock blitzed Back Room last night. Given the fast-paced nature of #the-balkans, I created a forum thread so that we can hopefully have a more meaningful and visible discussion of this topic, one that wiki mods/admins are more likely to weigh in on.

The most recent definition of a global I've seen from the wiki team is when two spheres fight each other. If I recall right, previously 5 out of the top 10 alliances or 10 out of the top 20 were the criteria needed for a global. I believe that neither of those are actually wide-ranging enough to determine if a war is a global or not, so to kick things off I'm offering some additional criteria that ought to potentially be taken into consideration:

-Political Ramifications. Johnsons v. HM had minimal political impact on most of the game, yet was still called a global. A war should be politically meaningful if it is to be called a global war.
-Total Damages/Duration. A war that lasts for 10 days and does under 250b in damage is considerably less major than a war that drags on for a month and a half and does over a trillion in damages.
-Radiation. Every continent being unable to produce food for a period of at least a few days is a global impact.
-Percent of Playerbase Involved. This is a tougher one to use as a fixed criteria, because the amount of "active" players can vary considerably even while the amount actually in alliances stays steady. Plus, a massive low tier war (i.e. one involving castle camelot) would skew this quite a bit.

There's certainly more things to consider than the six I listed, but those are a lot of the major ones that have been discussed. Because of how frequently this topic is brought up, hopefully we can reach a conclusion on what is and isn't a global war.

Edited May 21, 2022 by Changeup

[Monti]

Just now, Changeup said:

This is a discussion that came up frequently during the Johnsons-HM conflict (which, btw, is definitely not a global) and has been reignited after Clock blitzed Back Room last night. Given the fast-paced nature of #the-balkans, I created a forum thread so that we can hopefully have a more meaningful and visible discussion of this topic, one that wiki mods/admins are more likely to weigh in on.

The most recent definition of a global I've seen from the wiki team is when two spheres fight each other. If I recall right, previously 5 out of the top 10 alliances or 10 out of the top 20 were the criteria needed for a global. I believe that neither of those are actually wide-ranging enough to determine if a war is a global or not, so to kick things off I'm offering some additional criteria that ought to potentially be taken into consideration:

-Political Ramifications. Johnsons v. HM had minimal political impact on most of the game, yet was still called a global. A war should be politically meaningful if it is to be called a global war.
-Total Damages/Duration. A war that lasts for 10 days and does under 250b in damage is considerably less major than a war that drags on for a month and a half and does over a trillion in damages.
-Radiation. Every continent being unable to produce food for a period of at least a few days is a global impact.
-Percent of Playerbase Involved. This is a tougher one to use as a fixed criteria, because the amount of "active" players can vary considerably even while the amount actually in alliances stays steady. Plus, a massive low tier war (i.e. one involving castle camelot) would skew this quite a bit.

There's certainly more things to consider than the six I listed, but those are a lot of the major ones that have been discussed. Because of how frequently this topic is brought up, hopefully we can reach a conclusion on what is and isn't a global war.

should do a poll

[Changeup]

5 minutes ago, Monti said:

should do a poll

There's so many different combinations of variables, but I could try. Not sure if I can edit a poll in though.

EDIT: Added a poll.

Edited May 21, 2022 by Changeup

[Denison]

 

[hidude45454]

If most players think it is a global = it is a global

If most players don't think it is a global = it isn't a global

Truly, we live in a society :galaxybrain:

[Mayor]

I agree with what you say about the whole global wars thing, 2 direct spheres fighting does not equate to a global. At one point the "Great Leak War" was considered a "global" even through it was a side conflict in NPOLT and thankfully they changed that. If every war is considered a global it gets kinda crowded on the wiki just like with the thousands of independent Arrgh wars that were more raids than anything. The whole layout there is kind of a mess to begin with anyways.

[Changeup]

Well, shit.

[Keegoz]

I've long said we just need another category underneath global like 'major war'.

[Benfro]

I assure you that there are not six unique major spheres.
That said, its definitely difficult to define right now.

What I can say is that there has been an incredible stagnancy in the game the last few months.

[im317]

April 9th, 2022

 

"3:18 PM im317: imo anything that does not take food production to -100% worldwide is not a real global"

[Changeup]

1 hour ago, Benfro said:

I assure you that there are not six unique major spheres.

For the purposes of this discussion, yes there are. Johnsons v. HM was designated a global by the wiki team on those grounds, even though I disagree with that.

[Leftbehind]

15 minutes ago, Changeup said:

For the purposes of this discussion, yes there are. Johnsons v. HM was designated a global by the wiki team on those grounds, even though I disagree with that.

So the assumption is that the wiki is never wrong? 

Johnsons and HM are not majors. One is God tier the other is just tears. 

[Grave]

In my opinion a global is atleast 11 of the top 20 alliances (post militarization). 

[Jacob Knox]

Anything involving Clock is a global. Everything else is a mere side conflict. :serious:

[Prefontaine]

12 hours ago, Keegoz said:

I've long said we just need another category underneath global like 'major war'.

Alliance war, one or two alliances versus one or two alliances.
Sphere war, sphere versus sphere assuming there are more than 2 major spheres.
Global war, Multiple spheres, or two spheres with several alliances outside of the sphere involved as well.

[Kyubnyan]

If the server crashes it’s a global. Otherwise the involved parties are clearly doing something very wrong.

[JamieGamie]

If food production decreases by 10-15 times less than yea its global

[Changeup]

1 hour ago, JamieGamie said:

If food production decreases by 10-15 times less than yea its global

The issue with that metric is that a couple dozen nations stockpiling nukes and launching them indiscriminately five times a day *COULD* shut down food production, even though that's not a global.

[JamieGamie]

If you make a new country and wherever you go you need at least 8 farms to make even .02 tons of food surplus a day, that's a global war.

[Kyubnyan]

Just now, JamieGamie said:

If you make a new country and wherever you go you need at least 8 farms to make even .02 tons of food surplus a day, that's a global war.

Please don't produce food with a new nation... without the mass irrigation project... and with only 8 farms... kthx.

[JamieGamie]

?? had to restart, bro haccd my account 

[Grave]

On 5/22/2022 at 8:17 PM, JamieGamie said:

?? had to restart, bro haccd my account 

Then do a maunufactured good and put the 3 extra slots into commerce or pollution reduction depending on what you already have or dont have. 

You shouldn't do food unless you can do 20 farms and at least 4k land in each city with the farm project . (5k without but 4k and project is much cheaper) 

Edited May 24, 2022 by Grave

[Etat]

On 5/22/2022 at 8:31 AM, Changeup said:

...

I think any war arising between 2 or more spheres where treaties are activated and unequivocally impacting Orbis on the whole i.e. market impacts, political alignment alterations etc, is sufficient to label it a global.

[Dorian Grey]

On 5/25/2022 at 5:18 AM, Etat said:

I think any war arising between 2 or more spheres where treaties are activated and unequivocally impacting Orbis on the whole i.e. market impacts, political alignment alterations etc, is sufficient to label it a global.

In my opinion "Global" should be used less frequetly rather than more, it should be an elite title used in special occasions, such as when literally most of the game is involved and the political impact is NOT negligible. We can label other big wars as major wars, since they still are quite big, but not as big or impactful.

There should be three labels for a war, either global, major or minor conflict.

Using your definition, would you label a HM vs Jhonsons war global? When literally no bloc militarised? What about the Brethren Court vs CamSphere(Sol-Fso + allies vs cam+protectorates) they are technically two blocs, would you say it was a global?

[Jacob Knox]

On 5/22/2022 at 10:20 AM, Prefontaine said:

Alliance war, one or two alliances versus one or two alliances.
Sphere war, sphere versus sphere assuming there are more than 2 major spheres.
Global war, Multiple spheres, or two spheres with several alliances outside of the sphere involved as well.

I am inclined to agree with this. I think the game having a history of bipolarity has made everyone accustomed to calling almost every war involving two different blocs/spheres a "global." But the fact of the matter is that in the age of multi-spheres/multipolarity, not every war is a global.