War commentary.

[Prefontaine]

I was wondering what were peoples thoughts on what's happened in the last 32 hours and as the war progresses. What's surprised you, interested you, annoyed you? This thread isn't for alliance grandstanding or alliance politics, but thoughts and opinions on the individual scale and such doesn't reflect your alliances stance even if you run an alliance.

 

I'll start. I'm never really surprised by individuals leaving an alliance mid-war, or asking for peace on an individual scale but when you consider the size of this war, number of people total, I'm surprised how many people have tried to get out of war or fled prior to the war they knew was coming. Though some of the politics attempts to paint this as a curb stomp, it's no on the numbers side of things, the side winning has less numbers but more preparedness. I suppose that shows you should always be prepared, and very few people were keeping a war chest of note unless they were caught prior to building an improvement or something of the sort. 

 

I was hoping for some people to dig in and really fight, small groups of UPN, VoC, or BoC banding together and being tough to take down but that has happened few and far between from what I've noticed, but to those who have been and are, well done and keep it up. I imagine most of the uppers who have missiles will just attempt to turtle and lob a missile a day, which could be hard to keep up for long, will be interesting to see how it goes.

 

Biggest thing that annoyed me leading up to this war was seeing how VoC in particular handled its bank, giving large sums of money primarily to its leaders/top members. I imagine to get missiles, but this left their lower nations with a much smaller source of help aid wise. In the previous war there was a defector from VoC, Bernard (Or Berny as Scatheon liked to call him), whom told us VoC didn't care about any of their members, and that they were a means to feed their top nations with taxes, and when the members asked for war aid they got nothing. We also heard that from a few other sources as well, but watching it happen is fairly disgusting to me as another alliance leader. Alliances leaders exist to serve their members in my opinion, alliance members aren't something for leaders to use to pile up and stand atop of so they can serve their own needs. 

[Clarke]

I can't validate these sources as we never had a member in our alliance named Bernard, Berny or Scatheon. 

But at least we know you don't have a spy in our alliance. 

[Prefontaine]

I can't validate these sources as we never had a member in our alliance named Bernard, Berny or Scatheon. 

But at least we know you don't have a spy in our alliance. 

 

Oh right, he was EoS, but he did comment about you guys!

[Phiney]

I'm personally just glad to get war reports, make a refreshing change from not being attacked at all. Interesting to see how the market is slowly getting better due to the mass blockades

[Clarke]

Well he never interacted with our alliance at any level so I can't imagine how. 

 

But hey you should apologize for essentially attempting to take a crap on the memory of a now disbanded alliance, whom many of the government members are in Rose which you claim benefited from taxes.

[Reagan]

I was wondering what were peoples thoughts on what's happened in the last 32 hours and as the war progresses. What's surprised you, interested you, annoyed you? This thread isn't for alliance grandstanding or alliance politics, but thoughts and opinions on the individual scale and such doesn't reflect your alliances stance even if you run an alliance.

I don't see how you can have a thread like this without politics or grandstanding. Good luck though.

[Prefontaine]

I don't see how you can have a thread like this without politics or grandstanding. Good luck though.

 

Politics are fine, but alliance grandstanding, meh. Individual politics!

[Memph]

Oh right, he was EoS, but he did comment about you guys!

TBH I think he only commented on EoS.

 

I don't think giving out some funds for missiles to top nations is necessarily a bad idea, it's just a question of finding a balance between funding missiles and helping fund more "conventional" military for smaller nations. A big part of that depends on how long they can keep lobbing missiles for, and whether they'll run out of cash/resources.

 

I'm curious to see how the various tiers do. TC was strong at the very top, with seven 7 city nations and two 8 city nations (used to be three until Firetrout left), while the "coalition" has six 7 city nations and one 8 city nation. On the other hand, TC is outnumbered at 5 and 6 city nations, although it does have the advantage for 4, 3, 2 and 1 city nations.

 

The effect of blockades on the market is going to be interesting. I think in the last war they didn't have too much of an effect, but this time I think a lot of TC is under blockade. I haven't looked at UPN but pretty much all of DEIC's top 25 are blockaded. On the other hand, the coalition had big war chests and might not need to many resources.

 

Last thing is spies. It's true that Diabolos was hit more often than was supposed to be possible in a single day, but still, over the course of a few days of spy warfare, he could have been taking out even with just 3 attacks per day. I think there were others that had their missiles taken out at 3 spy missions per day. Because you can only build 1 missile per day, it's useful to begin to stockpile them before wars, however, they can get spied away. Especially as missile nations get more common, there's going to be a big temptation ahead of future wars to take them out, especially since you can do so without getting caught. I don't think many other games have a feature like this, which essentially leads to "war before war" and could create interesting politics.

[Phiney]

Yea it was a lot of fun coordinating with others to do the pre war spying, really enjoyed that part of this war

[Niklaus]

What surprised me?

 

Umm...
 

I will admit that I was a little bit surprised when Kyte left. The idea of one of my comrades betraying his own is not something I'd dismiss as being unrealistic but it was just something  that I had hoped I'd not see here. But that's about the extent of it. To be honest, nothing has happened in this war till now that can be counted as very astounding or greatly surprising. Only usual desertions and side-jumping.

 

The tactic of using spy operations to disable and dishearten your enemy before the actual war was also interesting to see. Adds another dimension to warfare. Mainly, I have been impressed by the numerous uses of spies. The scope for coordinated spy attacks for different objectives is quite large. And coordination in this area will have a significant, if not great, impact on the total damage caused.

 

Other than that. Nothing I haven't seen before.

[Speaker Faris Wheeler]

Both parties are doing there best at trying to wear the other down, it'll be interesting who will come out on top.

[Keegoz]

Both parties are doing there best at trying to wear the other down, it'll be interesting who will come out on top.

Considering that The Covenant are starting to run out of military in some crucial areas (Planes and Ships), I'd say that TC will be worn down first. However this war still has a bit left in it yet no doubt about it.

[Neo-Nexus]

This is very interesting!

[Keegoz]

Okay so, as much as I like to shit post on my opponents I do like how UPN in the lower tiers are taking advantage of their numbers down there. They outnumber our coalition quite heavily in that area but were still initially being beaten due to our guys being quite built up. However in some of my wars I noticed that they started to coordinate quite well and even put me into beige overnight by using there less forces to come at me all at once and overwhelm my ground forces even whilst I had air superiority.

 

DEIC however are extremely disappointing. Only a hand full of nations are putting up a fight whilst most haven't even bothered to try and fight us back. Some members didn't even know a war was happening, threatening to contact our leader for attacking DEIC's nations.

[Ollysho]

Absolutely sexy war on one side. Obviously the other was less prepared but I'm glad Rose/Guardian/SK is willing to admit the war is simply retaliation rather than trying to paint it as "protecting the global sphere" or something. I was afraid of that.

[Ranoik]

I'm almost 100% sure I've caused more damage to my nation than my enemies have, since wartime mobilization has cut my income by over half, which is such a nice change of pace from where I was during the last war (namely, between the pavement and UPN's jackboot)  Instead of continuing this silly war, I'd much rather have peace and reps to simulate further damage caused to TC nations, without actually having to do the damage.  

[Vincent]

To be honest I am kind of surprised how TC didn't see the war coming until the last few days when is almost too late to do anything significant to protect themselves.

 

I mean a simple look at the market for the past week or so where prices are crazy, doesn't that ring a bell that war is imminent ? Though it is hard to be able to tell with 100% accuracy who is going to fight whom in that war, it doesn't really hurt to take a little bit more precaution just in case it is your alliance being targeted. Frankly I only saw significant build up in TC only something like 48 to 72 hours before Rose and allies struck. Not sure if it was something to with their intel failure or Rose plus allies ability to conceal their build up using stealth technology?

 

2nd point that I notice is people from both sides resorted to reporting each others members as multi's. This was rather shameful. I mean politics aside, should everyone concentrate to weed out cheaters wherever they might be instead of purely highlighting those from the opposing camp while Cheaters in their same camp is tolerated? For me a cheater  is still  a cheater , never mind which alliance he /she belong to.

 

 

At the same time is worth noting that the current winning alliance seems to be adopt the same old strategy of not sending their opponent into beige but try to max out the damage on the enemy by using air strikes. If  I do not remember wrong the leader of Guardian voice out his concern on this issue sometime earlier, but instead we still see the members still doing the same old trick. Not sure if is the members own initiative to do so or was it any form of directive issued for them to act this way.

Edited December 15, 2014 by Vincent

[Tim Armstrong]

It was interesting to see how people took advantage of bugs or little known game mechanics (e.g. utter failure = sink ships) that were reported and discussed in OWF. It really highlights the ancillary ways that people play the game, namely OWF and IRC. Players who are not using these tools are putting themselves at a disadvantage.

[Prefontaine]

It was interesting to see how people took advantage of bugs or little known game mechanics (e.g. utter failure = sink ships) that were reported and discussed in OWF. It really highlights the ancillary ways that people play the game, namely OWF and IRC. Players who are not using these tools are putting themselves at a disadvantage.

 

Agreed. I don't mind if you general membership don't come and chat and hang out on IRC, but the gov should have an active presence there. That's how you get to know one another and form bonds that tend to be much stronger. Bug abuse is always bad.

[Filthy Fifths]

It was interesting to see how people took advantage of bugs or little known game mechanics (e.g. utter failure = sink ships) that were reported and discussed in OWF. It really highlights the ancillary ways that people play the game, namely OWF and IRC. Players who are not using these tools are putting themselves at a disadvantage.

 

Tim is true love <3

[Niklaus]

To be honest I am kind of surprised how TC didn't see the war coming until the last few days when is almost too late to do anything significant to protect themselves.

 

I mean a simple look at the market for the past week or so where prices are crazy, doesn't that ring a bell that war is imminent ? Though it is hard to be able to tell with 100% accuracy who is going to fight whom in that war, it doesn't really hurt to take a little bit more precaution just in case it is your alliance being targeted. Frankly I only saw significant build up in TC only something like 48 to 72 hours before Rose and allies struck. Not sure if it was something to with their intel failure or Rose plus allies ability to conceal their build up using stealth technology?

 

2nd point that I notice is people from both sides resorted to reporting each others members as multi's. This was rather shameful. I mean politics aside, should everyone concentrate to weed out cheaters wherever they might be instead of purely highlighting those from the opposing camp while Cheaters in their same camp is tolerated? For me a cheater  is still  a cheater , never mind which alliance he /she belong to.

 

 

At the same time is worth noting that the current winning alliance seems to be adopt the same old strategy of not sending their opponent into beige but try to max out the damage on the enemy by using air strikes. If  I do not remember wrong the leader of Guardian voice out his concern on this issue sometime earlier, but instead we still see the members still doing the same old trick. Not sure if is the members own initiative to do so or was it any form of directive issued for them to act this way.

A little bit precaution doesn't really help if your build hasn't been balanced military-econ wise from the very beginning.

Cheaters would more likely to be noticed when looking for targets and coordinating war efforts. Thus, the rise in multi reports can be attributed to this reason. As far the issue of cheaters being tolerated in one's own alliance goes, that is wrong if it is happening.

[Doom]

At the same time is worth noting that the current winning alliance seems to be adopt the same old strategy of not sending their opponent into beige but try to max out the damage on the enemy by using air strikes. If  I do not remember wrong the leader of Guardian voice out his concern on this issue sometime earlier, but instead we still see the members still doing the same old trick. Not sure if is the members own initiative to do so or was it any form of directive issued for them to act this way.

In war, the goal is to destroy the enemy, not give them protection. It is only natural that people will then do as much damage before allowing them to go into protection.

[Tim Armstrong]

Tim is true love <3

Well, thanks FilthyFifths. Don't think I've forgotten what you said to me when I met you though.

 

[Aisha Greyjoy]

Having a strategic stock in the alliance bank is key, but if your alliance is defending, you may have too many blockades up to be able to effectively use the stock.  Watching other bank's actions is important.

[Vincent]

How can you watch other banks action?. If you are not a member of the alliance then you won't even have access to the transaction of that alliance bank.