A Note on Guardian and The Seven Kingdoms

[Rozalia]

We'd be pretty bad allies not to point out their faults.

 

Well I can certainly agree with you for once on that... after all I am Rose's best ally.

 

[Hodor]

For what it is worth, I will try and convey the effect this thread has had on my personal resolve. As one of the few in Guardian who was on board with reps I had very clear reasons for wanting the war to end. After this thread I say, !@#$ it.

 

Yes, we were the aggressors. That isn't rocket science. Yet had we won we would not have demanded anything as we have always done.

 

No, the reps are not outrageously high, but the damage done to our nations is. If you want these reps out of principle or as some sort of symbol, simply demand a surrender. A Guardian admission of defeat is just as symbolic as reps and significantly less humiliating. Making said reps non-negotiable almost ensures their rejection.

 

Posting a thread like this is just about as close to ensuring no peace as anything you could have done. These talks should occur in private and if no agreement is reached, war continues. Let's act like adults, even if you perceive the opposition is acting childish.

 

 

 

I want peace, but not like this. I have no delusions of grandeur many of you seem to accuse every Guardian member of having. If it's peace you truly want, let's find a compromise. If not, then let's all shut up and keep warring.

 

 

*before people start making generalizations about Guardian, these opinions are mine and mine alone and do not reflect the opinions of Guardian as a whole*

Edited June 2, 2015 by Hodor

[Saru]

For what it is worth, I will try and convey the effect this thread has had on my personal resolve. As one of the few in Guardian who was on board with reps I had very clear reasons for wanting the war to end. After this thread I say, !@#$ it.

 

Yes, we were the aggressors. That isn't rocket science. Yet had we won we would not have demanded anything as we have always done.

 

No, the reps are not outrageously high, but the damage done to our nations is. If you want these reps out of principle or as some sort of symbol, simply demand a surrender. A Guardian admission of defeat is just as symbolic as reps and significantly less humiliating. Making said reps non-negotiable almost ensures their rejection.

 

Posting a thread like this is just about as close to ensuring no peace as anything you could have done. These talks should occur in private and if no agreement is reached, war continues. Let's act like adults, even if you perceive the opposition is acting childish.

 

 

 

I want peace, but not like this. I have no delusions of grandeur many of you seem to accuse every Guardian member of having. If it's peace you truly want, let's find a compromise. If not, then let's all shut up and keep warring.

 

 

*before people start making generalizations about Guardian, these opinions are mine and mine alone and do not reflect the opinions of Guardian as a whole*

 

Guardian were going to support SK's terms in the last global war, which was very early on in the game, and I would argue they were even harsher than these, given how the situation went down and you being the aggressors.

 

Also your leadership took this matter to the public forums first: http://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/6731-this-war-and-peace-talks/-- so talk about having double standards.

Edited June 2, 2015 by Saru

[Hodor]

Guardian were going to support SK's terms in the last global war, which was very early on in the game, and I would argue they were even harsher than these, given how the situation went down and you being the aggressors.

 

Also your leadership took this matter to the public forums first: http://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/6731-this-war-and-peace-talks/-- so talk about having double standards.

 

I had not seen that post. It seems we've both blundered. My other point still stands.

 

Also I'd argue, per usual, Tim worded her post far more diplomatically.

Edited June 2, 2015 by Hodor

[Dwynn]

Guardian were going to support SK's terms in the last global war, which was very early on in the game, and I would argue they were even harsher than these, given how the situation went down and you being the aggressors.

 

Also your leadership took this matter to the public forums first: http://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/6731-this-war-and-peace-talks/-- so talk about having double standards.

 

Now you're simply talking out of your ass. At no point was Guardian going to support SK's push for MLP decomissions. The only term we would accept were the ones we got. Quit spinning yarns to make your position stronger. I know what terms were talked about in Marionette War. And I know what was accepted. I also know that UPN was underhanded and tried to manipulate Rose to get them to capitulate.

[Abbas Mehdi]

I can confirm that guardian has never in the past pushed for levying reps, while it is true that sk in the coalition did propose terms and guardian didn't discourage them but guardian had confirmed about no reps and the identity of the leaker as the terms during the last days of the peace negotiations, it was mostly a rose vs sk squabble during the discussions. As for upn trying underhanded tactics, that's a bit of an exaggeration knowing the fact that rose since before the war had even started already stated it's position of ending it's own war in white peace cause upn, eos and deic had offered white peace to tac when the war concluded.  

Edited June 2, 2015 by Abbas Medhi

[Saru]

Now you're simply talking out of your ass. At no point was Guardian going to support SK's push for MLP decomissions. The only term we would accept were the ones we got. Quit spinning yarns to make your position stronger. I know what terms were talked about in Marionette War. And I know what was accepted. I also know that UPN was underhanded and tried to manipulate Rose to get them to capitulate.

 

Pre outright told me that they will support SK's decisions, even though he may not necessarily agree with them. The way I see it, is that you not saying no outright, and discouraging them from demanding the terms, facilitated them pushing for it. Just because you didn't push or come up with it yourselves, don't mean that you don't bear any responsibility for it... because in large part it was your strength at the time that enabled them to even consider it. (In the same way UPN are partly responsible for VE's terms for you.)

 

As for us being "underhanded", it was a war. Given that you attacked us purely because you wanted to become the top dogs, pretended that you had no issues with us for months and then blindsighted us, I don't think being honorable towards you was ever going to be a priority. All we did was seek out peace agreements individually, as opposed to coalition wide like Guardian demanded. You guys were just bitter that we somewhat pulled it off, and it contributed to the existing rift between SK-Rose, and you had to hold it together. I imagine it also dented your massive egos given that we're one of the few alliances that didn't submit to all of your !@#$.

 

... and in the end, Guardian are the last people to criticise others about being manipulative. Given that pretty much all of the Rose government at the time were in consensus that they were played bigtime by you.

Edited June 2, 2015 by Saru

[Dwynn]

Pre outright told me that they will support SK's decisions, even though he may not necessarily agree with them. The way I see it, is that you not saying no outright, and discouraging them from demanding the terms, facilitated them pushing for it. Just because you didn't push or come up with it yourselves, don't mean that you don't bear any responsibility for it... because in large part it was your strength at the time that enabled them to even consider it. (In the same way UPN are partly responsible for VE's terms for you.)

 

As for us being "underhanded", it was a war. Given that you attacked us purely because you wanted to become the top dogs, pretended that you had no issues with us for months and then blindsighted us, I don't think being honorable towards you was ever going to be a priority. All we did was seek out peace agreements individually, as opposed to coalition wide like Guardian demanded. You guys were just bitter that we somewhat pulled it off, and it contributed to the existing rift between SK-Rose, and you had to hold it together. I imagine it also dented your massive egos given that we're one of the few alliances that didn't submit to all of your !@#$.

 

... and in the end, Guardian are the last people to criticise others about being manipulative. Given that pretty much all of the Rose government at the time were in consensus that they were played bigtime by you.

 

No, what dents my ego is that you would sling lies like they're spoken from the Almighty Himself. You know for a damned fact that the term you're insinuating was presented was never an official term. But yes, please, let's now make it a precedent to hold ALL government members accountable for what they say at ALL times, whether or not official. I recall many a times when Orbis was told "oh don't mind Underlordgc. He's our MoFA but he just likes to troll and talk shit."

[rapmanej]

 

Yes, we were the aggressors. That isn't rocket science. Yet had we won we would not have demanded anything as we have always done.

 

 

 

You do realize that there is a huge difference in the aggressor demanding reps, rather than the defender who was attacked using a "bored, so war" CB.  

[Memph]

What happened as I see it/afaik:

 

For a good amount of time, Guardian has had somewhat of a balance of powers approach to the game. We were opposed to the idea of a "hegemoney" and even if such a large power was not necessarily making specific threats against other alliances. I suspect this is at least part the reason why Prefontaine decided not to have us ally with VE as they were getting increasingly powerful, even though we were on relatively friendly terms.

 

Also around this time, Grillick's (GPA leader) actions did not reflect those of a neutral alliance, and GPA's members were increasingly dominating the game's upper tier. So Guardian and SK start a war against GPA to avoid having them become too powerful. Speaking personally, I was also hoping that this would encourage other alliances to make moves since they would no longer have to worry about falling far far behind GPA if these other alliances went to war against each other.

 

The Marionette war and GPA war were both more costly to Guardian than some seem to realize. Although it's true that it gave us the upper hand, I suspect that with the Marionette war, in terms of how many weeks of growth the war effort cost Guardian vs their opponent, the difference was not that huge. For example, while DEIC lost more infra than Guardian, a big part of the reason that DEIC had more higher infra nations was that they didn't put as much into war chests. I wouldn't be surprised if the value of Guardian's war chest before the Marionette war was greater than the value of the infra we destroyed. And Guardian did lose some infra too, mostly from missiles which DEIC had a bit more of.

 

The war still allowed Guardian's top tier to overtake DEIC's, but then we got into the war with GPA. Guardian actually lost a fair bit more infra against GPA, since a good chunk of GPA's nations (at least those Guardian was fighting) had missiles vs just 3-4 nations in DEIC. Plus there was the cost to make sure we'd control the air, gas, ammo, etc. I think the war with GPA allowed DEIC's nations to regain what they fell behind by in the Marionette War, or just about. UPN's upper tier by the way was always a bit behind Guardian's by the way, definitely after the war with TAC but I think before too to a lesser extent.

 

Anyways, VE began to be concerned that we would attack them around this point. They militarized significantly in response to our militarization to hit GPA thinking we might be hitting them. And with GPA out of the way and the CB used to hit them, and solid growth from VE putting them into the number one spot, it was understandable they would feel that way. However, at least at first, we weren't planning on making a move on VE. If we kept trying to knock down the top dog, with one war after another, we'd eventually get worn down, and the list of former opponents looking for revenge would get too big to deal with and we'd get stomped. We weren't that arrogant believe it or not... and we certainly did not think we could knock VE off the first page. Once the war with GPA was over, we were willing to let someone else get into the driver's seat.

 

One of the things Shellhound found out while spying was that VE was preparing for war with us soon after we hit GPA. No-one else in Guardian knew he found out about this through spying and it's not like spying is the only way to get this sort of intel. Also the intel Shellhound gained did not make it clear if VE was just preparing for a war that they expected we would start or if they would start it themselves. However, it did add fuel to a "cold war" of sorts. It meant that VE was going to try to counter our power, and it made it seem unlikely that the next major was would be between anyone else than VE and Guardian/SK's spheres. You basically had a 1913/1914 type situation where it's safe to say that the Triple Alliance wasn't going to start a war with the USA, the only war the Triple Alliance was going to commit significant resources to was one with the Triple Entente. VE signed a bunch of treaties, and Guardian responded by dropping our paperless stance and signing treaties of our own. I think the thinking was if war was going to happen, might as well get ahead of it and use the advantage of surprise. Whether or not that was the right call is debatable, but it is what it is.

 

At the same time, SK makes their plans to have Rose take much of the damage in the war with VE/allies and then backstab them. I'm pretty sure even Shellhound only found out about this after Rose got the leaked plans from SK's forums. That eventually got its way to VE and we found out that VE/allies and Rose/allies were planning on doing a pre-emptive strike against us. Even with DEIC on our side and UPN/BoC/Terradoxia neutral we would be at a numerical disadvantage and our best and only chance would have been to pre-empt their pre-emptive strike of our pre-emptive strike... So basically it was a long build up of tensions on both sides, and it just so happened that Guardian/SK/Mensa pulled the trigger first.

 

People mentioned that the reps being asked are just token reps or insignificant. Maybe they are not that big compared to the damage dealt, or to reps in planet Bob. Fortunately this is not Bob, and honestly I'm glad because I don't think it's a good for the game to take several months if not more to recover from losing a war. Shorter time frames makes for a more dynamic game. Also if you're going to compare it to the damage dealt, there is simply no chance that we would have accepted those (which I'm glad VE gov understands). Just because we caused billions in damages (I'm sure we took over 1 billion in damages too) doesn't mean we spent billions on the war or are able to pay billions in reps. The reps being asked would probably take about 6-7 days to repay for Guardian and maybe 8-9 days for SK if we dedicated 100% of our income to that for those days. It's not permanently crippling but no insignificant either. It's not much less than the total value of Guardian's military + all our infra. The difference in how many days of delayed/lost growth the Marionette war cost us vs TC is probably in the same ball park too.

 

Also a few people mentioned that if you attack someone and lose reps are to be expected and expecting anything else is arrogant and used rogues as an analogy. Well I'm not sure about other alliances, but when a rogue attacks Guardian, there's basically two options, either pay reps, or get destroyed. What getting destroyed means exactly will vary, it's not necessarily zero infra, but definitely heavy damage. However, we don't destroy rogues and then expect them to pay reps (not even token reps), so bad analogy... 

[Saru]

No, what dents my ego is that you would sling lies like they're spoken from the Almighty Himself. You know for a damned fact that the term you're insinuating was presented was never an official term. But yes, please, let's now make it a precedent to hold ALL government members accountable for what they say at ALL times, whether or not official. I recall many a times when Orbis was told "oh don't mind Underlordgc. He's our MoFA but he just likes to troll and talk !@#$."

 

Yeah, let's pretend that Under is UPN's Tenages. 

 

And MLP decoms were an official term, although when he asked for it he said it's a choice between that and another round of war. But the point is that if Rose didn't have any backbone whatsoever, SK most likely would of been able to push whatever they wanted -- and that could of been outright MLP decoms and even longer war like first discussed (again keep in mind how early on in the game this was.) Because like Guardian said themselves to me, they may not agree with all of the decisions, but they will support their allies if that's what they wanted.

[Saru]

The Marionette war and GPA war were both more costly to Guardian than some seem to realize. Although it's true that it gave us the upper hand, I suspect that with the Marionette war, in terms of how many weeks of growth the war effort cost Guardian vs their opponent, the difference was not that huge. For example, while DEIC lost more infra than Guardian, a big part of the reason that DEIC had more higher infra nations was that they didn't put as much into war chests. I wouldn't be surprised if the value of Guardian's war chest before the Marionette war was greater than the value of the infra we destroyed. And Guardian did lose some infra too, mostly from missiles which DEIC had a bit more of.

 

The war still allowed Guardian's top tier to overtake DEIC's, but then we got into the war with GPA. Guardian actually lost a fair bit more infra against GPA, since a good chunk of GPA's nations (at least those Guardian was fighting) had missiles vs just 3-4 nations in DEIC. Plus there was the cost to make sure we'd control the air, gas, ammo, etc. I think the war with GPA allowed DEIC's nations to regain what they fell behind by in the Marionette War, or just about. UPN's upper tier by the way was always a bit behind Guardian's by the way, definitely after the war with TAC but I think before too to a lesser extent.

 

 

This is full of incredible understatements. DEIC not only didn't have many stockpiles/units, they didn't have anything. Guardian/SK went virtually untouched throughout the war, and we took massive damages because we had little to no units, and you were able to stack your attacks when we were defenseless -- which caused crazy infra damages at the time with aircraft being OP. Given how young the game was, this is significant, we didn't have any cash to just rebuild infra straight away, nor a lot of cities to make the rebuilding process fast and fairly cheap.  

 

Also UPN's top tier was just behind Guardian's, although it was marginal. And DEIC had a superior one. In score alone. After the war, SK/Guardian/TEst were untouchable for many months. So trying to play down Marionette war as being costly, is just silly imo. The only cost  that it had was that you pissed some people off, who made sure you would get your due.

 

One of the things Shellhound found out while spying was that VE was preparing for war with us soon after we hit GPA. No-one else in Guardian knew he found out about this through spying and it's not like spying is the only way to get this sort of intel. Also the intel Shellhound gained did not make it clear if VE was just preparing for a war that they expected we would start or if they would start it themselves. However, it did add fuel to a "cold war" of sorts. It meant that VE was going to try to counter our power, and it made it seem unlikely that the next major was would be between anyone else than VE and Guardian/SK's spheres. You basically had a 1913/1914 type situation where it's safe to say that the Triple Alliance wasn't going to start a war with the USA, the only war the Triple Alliance was going to commit significant resources to was one with the Triple Entente. VE signed a bunch of treaties, and Guardian responded by dropping our paperless stance and signing treaties of our own. I think the thinking was if war was going to happen, might as well get ahead of it and use the advantage of surprise. Whether or not that was the right call is debatable, but it is what it is.

 

 

I have been working with VE for a significant period of time, and I am confident that if they had any plans to go after Guardian, they would of informed us. They didn't. So I very much doubt this information, particularly when VE aren't known to reveal that kind of stuff to ordinary members anyway -- and that's the mask that Shellhound's account had. It was pretty much common knowledge for awhile that Guardian/SK were going to go after VE aggressively, and I feel like all of rumours of VE doing the same was just to justify it to your members/the public.

 

At the same time, SK makes their plans to have Rose take much of the damage in the war with VE/allies and then backstab them. I'm pretty sure even Shellhound only found out about this after Rose got the leaked plans from SK's forums. That eventually got its way to VE and we found out that VE/allies and Rose/allies were planning on doing a pre-emptive strike against us. Even with DEIC on our side and UPN/BoC/Terradoxia neutral we would be at a numerical disadvantage and our best and only chance would have been to pre-empt their pre-emptive strike of our pre-emptive strike... So basically it was a long build up of tensions on both sides, and it just so happened that Guardian/SK/Mensa pulled the trigger first.

 

 

The point is that the initial plan was to hit them first, and in the end, you still hit them first. You were the aggressors, and you lost the war. It really is that simple.

 

Also a few people mentioned that if you attack someone and lose reps are to be expected and expecting anything else is arrogant and used rogues as an analogy. Well I'm not sure about other alliances, but when a rogue attacks Guardian, there's basically two options, either pay reps, or get destroyed. What getting destroyed means exactly will vary, it's not necessarily zero infra, but definitely heavy damage. However, we don't destroy rogues and then expect them to pay reps (not even token reps), so bad analogy... 

 

 

The way I see it is that if a rogue hits an alliance, then it is upto that alliance to decide when and how the rogue gets peace. That's a consequence of their actions. Also didn't you guys demand reps on Emily's/Clarke's behalf when he left DEIC and went rogue on you?

[Memph]

Yeah, let's pretend that Under is UPN's Tenages. 

 

And MLP decoms were an official term, although when he asked for it he said it's a choice between that and another round of war. But the point is that if Rose didn't have any backbone whatsoever, SK most likely would of been able to push whatever they wanted -- and that could of been outright MLP decoms and even longer war like first discussed (again keep in mind how early on in the game this was.) Because like Guardian said themselves to me, they may not agree with all of the decisions, but they will support their allies if that's what they wanted.

Putting aside your speculation about ifs and buts, if what you're saying is true (I think it is) about MLP decom vs third round, that's not the same as non-negotiable reps. If we can get white peace after 3 rounds, which is tomorrow night by the way, I'll be perfectly happy with that.

 

As for the Marionette war being early on in the game, I would say that that war set UPN back by maybe 3-4 weeks compared to neutrals. This war has probably already set Guardian back by - I estimate - about 6-9 weeks compared to neutrals.

[Dwynn]

Putting aside your speculation about ifs and buts, if what you're saying is true (I think it is) about MLP decom vs third round, that's not the same as non-negotiable reps. If we can get white peace after 3 rounds, which is tomorrow night by the way, I'll be perfectly happy with that.

 

As for the Marionette war being early on in the game, I would say that that war set UPN back by maybe 3-4 weeks compared to neutrals. This war has probably already set Guardian back by - I estimate - about 6-9 weeks compared to neutrals.

 

The cost of losing an aggressive war when you underestimate your enemy. I've never been against the reps, simply the blasphemy that has been stated surrounding the past.

[Kadin]

blah blah blah

At this point I'm honestly sick of listening to Guardian try to paint their wars of conquest as something they're not. Stop insulting our intelligence.

[Dwynn]

At this point I'm honestly sick of listening to Guardian try to paint their wars of conquest as something they're not. Stop insulting our intelligence.

 

So your sphere asks for Memph to come out of the woodwork, he does, and you brush him off. Go back under your bridge Estelle.

[Keegoz]

At this point I'm honestly sick of listening to Guardian try to paint their wars of conquest as something they're not. Stop insulting our intelligence.

I'm sick of watching you post bias crap because you're still hurt that Guardian never loved you as a child.

[Kadin]

So your sphere asks for Memph to come out of the woodwork, he does, and you brush him off. Go back under your bridge Estelle.

I am not speaking for them. I'm not even part of the peace talks. However, I know Guardian, and I know their explanations are BS. I'm tired of them trying to pretend to be something they're not.

 

 

I'm sick of watching you post bias crap because you're still hurt that Guardian never loved you as a child.

That makes no sense. Next time think before you post. Edited June 2, 2015 by Estelle

[Saru]

Putting aside your speculation about ifs and buts, if what you're saying is true (I think it is) about MLP decom vs third round, that's not the same as non-negotiable reps. If we can get white peace after 3 rounds, which is tomorrow night by the way, I'll be perfectly happy with that.

 

As for the Marionette war being early on in the game, I would say that that war set UPN back by maybe 3-4 weeks compared to neutrals. This war has probably already set Guardian back by - I estimate - about 6-9 weeks compared to neutrals.

 

I'm not sure if you are purposely ignoring what I said. Had Rose not stood up for us, SK would of got their terms pushed through -- because Guardian, whilst didn't actively pushed for it themselves, told me that they would support their allies in their decisions. And their terms that they were talking about before getting shut down were to extend the war AND to decom all of our missile projects.

 

And again, I don't agree with your metrics, and think that given the stage of the game, the war was a lot tougher on us than it has been so far on you. Although I predict that if you stay stubborn and foolish, that yes you will soon reach a stage where Guardian will be hurt even more than UPN was in our last war. The difference being this was entirely through your own fault. Both because you started the war, and refused to accept fair reps at a reasonable time.

[Boony]

Is there any proof that VE was planning to attack guardian some day? Like logs or screen shots?

if not, all you have is rumors. And there were a lot of rumors on our side that said guardian was going to attack the VE sphere.

[Saru]

Is there any proof that VE was planning to attack guardian some day? Like logs or screen shots?

if not, all you have is rumors. And there were a lot of rumors on our side that said guardian was going to attack the VE sphere.

 

You really think neither tS or UPN would of known about it? Were VE planning a suicide run into Guardian and co without asking any of their friends/parties with mutual interests to help?  It's a silly argument, especially given that their source is Shellhound's multi... who had an ordinary member mask. Stuff like that certainly isn't seriously discussed by the gov members in the member only boards. And I am not entirely sure if I would trust Shellhound given his dishonest track record -- but that call is for Guardian to make.

 

If you're going to spy for months, break the rules in the process/risk yourself getting reset and your alliance hurt in the process, atleast try and not make sure it's a complete failure. 

Edited June 2, 2015 by Saru

[Clarke]

 

The way I see it is that if a rogue hits an alliance, then it is upto that alliance to decide when and how the rogue gets peace. That's a consequence of their actions. Also didn't you guys demand reps on Emily's/Clarke's behalf when he left DEIC and went rogue on you?

 Pre said his members wanted that, I figure those members are no longer a part of Guardian and are not involved in this war.

[Keegoz]

-snip-

Probably one of the better posts in this thread, especially from Guardian.

 

It is rather sad that this thread has almost become people airing more dirty laundry (Myself included), if anything this thread hasn't helped at all in seeing an end to this conflict. Heck if you didn't know better you could mistake this for a DoW thread with the anger that is coming from both sides. Let's be honest the way this will end is if we are going to be more constructive about how we shall end this war. I do not think it is helpful for one side to be using its dominance in a war to justify not continuing dialogue and I don't think the dismissive manner in which Guardian believes it was only protecting its interests as a reason to pay nothing at all very constructive.

 

tl;dr This thread is a waste of time and it's quite obvious that this war needs to go longer or some meaningful constructive dialogue happens (Probably not going to happen on the OWF)

Edited June 2, 2015 by Keegoz

[Saru]

Probably one of the better posts in this thread, especially from Guardian.

 

It is rather sad that this thread has almost become people airing more dirty laundry (Myself included), if anything this thread hasn't helped at all in seeing an end to this conflict. Heck if you didn't know better you could mistake this for a DoW thread with the anger that is coming from both sides. Let's be honest the way this will end is if we are going to be more constructive about how we shall end this war. I do not think it is helpful for one side to be using its dominance in a war to justify not continuing dialogue and I don't think the dismissive manner in which Guardian believes it was only protecting its interests as a reason to pay nothing at all very constructive.

 

tl;dr This thread is a waste of time and it's quite obvious that this war needs to go longer or some meaningful constructive dialogue happens (Probably not going to happen on the OWF)

 

Right.

 

I think the biggest mistake was taking this to the OWF in the first place. But seems to me like VE's thread was merely a response to Guardian's. Not quite sure what Guardian thought they would achieve out of it, apart from making things more difficult.

Edited June 2, 2015 by Saru

[Memph]

This is full of incredible understatements. DEIC not only didn't have many stockpiles/units, they didn't have anything. Guardian/SK went virtually untouched throughout the war, and we took massive damages because we had little to no units, and you were able to stack your attacks when we were defenseless -- which caused crazy infra damages at the time with aircraft being OP. Given how young the game was, this is significant, we didn't have any cash to just rebuild infra straight away, nor a lot of cities to make the rebuilding process fast and fairly cheap.  

 

Also UPN's top tier was just behind Guardian's, although it was marginal. And DEIC had a superior one. In score alone. After the war, SK/Guardian/TEst were untouchable for many months. So trying to play down Marionette war as being costly, is just silly imo. The only cost  that it had was that you pissed some people off, who made sure you would get your due.

 

There were quite a few missiles launched against us by DEIC, mostly against our high infra nations, I agree other damage was insignificant but the money put into war prep that allowed us to do the damage we did was not. I had 6 cities at the time with 800 infra in each, and was about even with DEIC's #10-15 nations. I think we did about 200 infra damage per city per nation, so about $3-6 million in damages at that level per nation. I think it was about 30 vs 20 on the Guardian vs DEIC front (DEIC had other nations on top of those 20 facing Rose).

 

$6m x 20 = $120m in damages

 

Guardian spent about $120m on militarizing, fuel and ammo.

 

The DEIC nations I was facing should have been making about $750k pre-war and maybe $500k after the infra loss, so the infra damage should not have taken too long to rebuild. Even if you went from 800 infra to nothing which did not happen that would have only been $7.3m in damage or about 10 days worth of pre-war peace time income. 

 

So Guardian members had something along the lines of

7 days prep + 10 days war + 1-2 days fixing improvements + 1 day rebuilding infra = 20 days

 

vs DEIC

~2 days prep + 10 days war + 1-2 days fixing improvements + 10 days rebuilding infra = 25 days

 

These are just rough calculations of course, but I don't think they're too far off. And part of the reason why DEIC had a superior upper tier was their smaller war chest, Guardian started building our war chest weeks before the war, putting aside a little every day, we actually had about $200m in war chest but didn't spend it all. Guardian probably could've have closed much of that gap with DEIC if we had spent our war chest on building up our cities.

 

I've taken about $65-70m in infra damages this war, plus about $35m worth of war chest. I was making about $2m pre-war but would only be making about $1m now with my infra losses.

 

17 days prep + 14 days of war + 1-2 days fixing improvements + ~50 days rebuilding infra = 80+ days worth of falling behind compared to neutrals

 

No matter how you adjust the exact numbers I'm pretty sure this one is putting a bigger dent on growth.

Edited June 2, 2015 by Memph